Students in New York occupy Wall Street

Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Students in New York occupy Wall Street

In the heart of global finances there is a civil unrest of people, who demand justice and social security. People do not want to suffer anymore because of greed, corruption and selfishness, which are the base of the current economic system.

At the beginning of September, a group of young people gathered in New York through the Internet and social media. They decided to show their disagreement with the current situation of majority of USA citizens. They chose Wall Street as the place of their protest, because the majority of crises and problems of contemporary world originate there. They have had enough of the incessant worsening of social, economic and financial affairs of vast majority of Americans, while the real culprits among bankers and corporations are rewared for their mistakes. They do not hide their inspirations by similar actions in Spain or Egypt. They want to continue in protest actions, until they achieve change of this system. For the saturday of 17.9. they organized the protest gathering, right at the heart of the financial world, the Wall Street. Several thousand people arrived, mostly young and students. Although the police prevented them from marching in front of the main stock market buildings, their protest was heard far. One of the action's goals was for some of them to stop this financial machine, which is the source of corruption, poverty, greed and does not bring anything good to the common people. As one of the participants said, they also want to talk about the problems from where they originate, because the contemporary market system must be humanized.

 

 

 

 

 

They want an economic system, where people will decide for people and not rich for the rich.

People of various opinions and from various groups gathered at the demonstration, but also the common people, who are not content with the current crisis and its solution. We can just quote some slogans on the transparents:

"We want to disturb war, not peace"

"Stop dealing with our future"

"People, not profit" "New Yorkers say enough to the greed of Wall Street“ "Wall Street is our street" "Give people work, not war!" "Can't afford a lobbyist - I'm one of 99% of the people"  

They plan the protest as long-termed occupation of the area and they also call on other cities to join them. And really, some other cities underwent similar  actions. For example, in Boston people entered a branch of Bank of America and demanded, that the bank must return what received from the people through the state, start investing into the economy and stop cancelling job positions.    In New York meanwhile the protests continue the third day already. Hundreds of tired demonstrants sleep on sidewalks and in parks. During the day, the numbers of protesters grow to several thousand. 

 

Together with the thought of public protests, there is spontaneously organized New York general assembly, where people discuss about what they want and how to achieve it. It is an open, horizontally organized plattform, where people together want to become a force, that will counteract the current crises. To achieve that, mere thoughts are not enough. This is why they learn there how to lead a collective discussions, how to communicate with media, how to arrange a legal support for the actions, etc.
The protesters estabilished their HQ in a nearby park, which was renamed on the Freedom park. The organizers succesfully use the Internet since the beginning and they provide regular news on their website https://occupywallst.org, including videoreports, general assembly meeting notes, people's  suggestions, and also calls for further actions and links to allied websites. Sympathies of people from all the America and other countries show in such a way, that when they asked for food provision, the local pizzeria was just in a hour flooded with orders from all the continent and Europe. People readily give their raincoats or blankets, to help in the protest. The procession goes every day into the surrounding streets and is joined by many bystanders, so it often returns several times bigger than it started.   In comments to one of the videos from protest action there are mostly opinions of agreement. One cogent opinion says: "The history proves, that when students start to demonstrate peacefully and they have the right, WE all start too... that's close to the revolution, change. We need these young people to get us started! They are our future and they want their rights... What's wrong about that?"

  *************************************   My comment:   I found surprisingly few news about this. None in the media, very little on the Google. Weird. I hope this is not hoax. I really did not expect this kind of thing, so soon and in the heart of financial axis of evil.  The text is my hasty translation from Czech website prichod.cz (means arrival) which watches and reports on signs of hope and change in the world. So please, you who live nearby, can you tell me something more about this?  I want the people's voice grow stronger and stop Wall Street's systematic misuse of money, stop all worldwide financial speculation and stock market trade with resources. This looks like a significant step towards it. Remember, sharing will save the world. In other words, the resource-based economy, not the current global resource market, controlled by a handful of rich people. 

 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10628
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
First I heard of it. Not

First I heard of it. Not surprised.

Rich better wise up soon, because the guillotine is getting closer with every year.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
 Looks like this is

 Looks like this is starting to be called a global revolution. They've started a live stream, worth watching what's happening right now in your country. 

http://www.livestream.com/globalrevolution

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


neptewn
Silver Member
neptewn's picture
Posts: 296
Joined: 2007-06-25
User is offlineOffline
A Message From Occupied Wall

A Message From Occupied Wall Street (Day Five)
Published 2011-09-22 07:51:42 UTC by OccupyWallSt
at OccupyWallStreet.org

This is the fifth communiqué from the 99 percent. We are occupying Wall Street.
On September 21st, 2011, Troy Davis, an innocent man, was murdered by the state of Georgia. Troy Davis was one of the 99 percent.

Ending capital punishment is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, four of our members were arrested on baseless charges.
Ending police intimidation is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, the richest 400 Americans owned more than half of the country’s population.

Ending wealth inequality is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, we determined that Yahoo lied about occupywallst.org being in spam filters.

Ending corporate censorship is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly eighty percent of Americans thought the country was on the wrong track.

Ending the modern gilded age is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly 15% of Americans approved of the job Congress was doing.

Ending political corruption is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly one sixth of Americans did not have work.
Ending joblessness is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly one sixth of America lived in poverty.
Ending poverty is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly fifty million Americans were without health insurance.

Ending health-profiteering is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, America had military bases in around one hundred and thirty out of one hundred and sixty-five countries.

Ending American imperialism is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, America was at war with the world.

Ending war is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, we stood in solidarity with Madrid, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Madison, Toronto, London, Athens, Sydney, Stuttgart, Tokyo, Milan, Amsterdam, Algiers, Tel Aviv, Portland and Chicago. Soon we will stand with Phoenix, Montreal, Cleveland and Atlanta. We’re still here. We are growing. We intend to stay until we see movements toward real change in our country and the world.

You have fought all the wars. You have worked for all the bosses. You have wandered over all the countries. Have you harvested the fruits of your labors, the price of your victories? Does the past comfort you? Does the present smile on you? Does the future promise you anything? Have you found a piece of land where you can live like a human being and die like a human being? On these questions, on this argument, and on this theme, the struggle for existence, the people will speak. Join us.

We speak as one. All of our decisions, from our choice to march on Wall Street to our decision to continue occupying Liberty Square, were decided through a consensus based process by the group, for the group.

Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer. - William S. Burroughs


Watcher
atheist
Posts: 2326
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
That's a lot more than one

That's a lot more than one demand.   They need an editor.   Are there no editors in the 99 percent?

Fuck, I should have been an editor.

"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci


neptewn
Silver Member
neptewn's picture
Posts: 296
Joined: 2007-06-25
User is offlineOffline
Watcher wrote:That's a lot

Watcher wrote:

That's a lot more than one demand.   They need an editor.   Are there no editors in the 99 percent?

Fuck, I should have been an editor.

Yeah, not sure what the "one demand" thing is all about.

 

A video of some female protesters getting maced by cops.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moD2JnGTToA&feature=youtu.be

Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer. - William S. Burroughs


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10628
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
It's a semi-common tactic to

It's a semi-common tactic to play with English when attempting to be artful. I've done it myself on occasion. I agree it doesn't work too well here, for me, but I'm sure it seems more powerful as a result to some. More than likely it was written by youth.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
neptewn wrote:On September

neptewn wrote:

On September 21st, 2011, we stood in solidarity with Madrid, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Madison, Toronto, London, Athens, Sydney, Stuttgart, Tokyo, Milan, Amsterdam, Algiers, Tel Aviv, Portland and Chicago. Soon we will stand with Phoenix, Montreal, Cleveland and Atlanta. We’re still here. We are growing. We intend to stay until we see movements toward real change in our country and the world.

Holy crap, there's that much of international support? So it's really a global revolution. I thought they meant it just as a continuation of Arab spring, Iceland revolution and Spanish and London riots. I'm glad to see these cities know about each other. Now let's hope Prague gets on the list!
 
neptewn wrote:
You have fought all the wars. You have worked for all the bosses. You have wandered over all the countries. Have you harvested the fruits of your labors, the price of your victories? Does the past comfort you? Does the present smile on you? Does the future promise you anything? Have you found a piece of land where you can live like a human being and die like a human being? On these questions, on this argument, and on this theme, the struggle for existence, the people will speak. Join us.
Good point. Most of us were running in a monetary treadmill (I'm beginning to like that expression) for someone else. What about giving a good part of the money and power back to the communities, where we can reach the leaders? 
I think the only way to create a stable society is to make it so good, that people will gladly work for its benefit, kind of like freeware developers work.

And something within me (and it's not the stum) wants to show a big F-inger to all these dystopian writers, filmmakers and pub ranters, by bringing the new golden age of optimal world management.

Vastet wrote:
It's a semi-common tactic to play with English when attempting to be artful. I've done it myself on occasion. I agree it doesn't work too well here, for me, but I'm sure it seems more powerful as a result to some. More than likely it was written by youth.
Yep, and possibly it was one of their street courses of dicussion and rhetorics Smiling

On the other hand, I've watched some people's testimonies on how the police was violent and how a shopkeeper let them in his shop to not get arested. He gave them water to rinse their eyes of tear gas, new clothes, even cigarettes. These people really have support from everyone around. Mom says this is just like the Velvet revolution in 1989, when people gave out thermos flasks with hot tea and blankets to the protesters, because it was in November and snow started to fall. 

 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


TonyZXT
atheist
TonyZXT's picture
Posts: 174
Joined: 2007-09-30
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:First I heard

Vastet wrote:
First I heard of it. Not surprised. Rich better wise up soon, because the guillotine is getting closer with every year.

 

Curious what you mean by that?  

 

Really weird that something like this is would be going on, with nothing in the media.  I hope these people don't give up.  Sounds like they need people to help out in getting publicity for it.  Without that they are just camping.  We need to do more than give lip service to change.  We need to have an open dialog and figure out what change is going to actually be effective.

Herein lies the rub with the financial crisis as I see it.  The public is largely ignorant of economics, and the ones who do know something about it can't agree on a damn thing about what is needed.  On another forum I go to, there's a politics/religion section which I mostly steer clear of.  They have several threads with people arguing on changing the financial situation in the US.   What I've seen on several occasions is that someone makes a suggestion that seems on the surface to be a good idea that would have a positive effect.   Then 3 people come in right behind them and say "it's clear you have zero understanding of economics."  Then they usually give a convincing argument of why said scheme is unrealistic in the real world.    Mix in people calling each other Libtards, socialists and ignorant neo cons, and a bunch of other unhelpful crap and that pretty much sums up what goes on.  I am pretty ignorant myself when it comes to economics, so I'm confused as hell about what would work.  

In the end I think bipartisan politics is going to keep us from a set of workable solutions TBH.  Kind of like how Obama's health care plan (whether it was originally good or complete shit.)  It never had a chance because the two sides fought until we had a horrible hodge podge of whatever both parties could be pressured to agree on.  Then it gets called Obamacare by the right so they can condemn the left when it goes wrong, knowing full well that wasn't Obama's plan that got passed.  Part of me wonders if bi-partisan politics won't be the downfall of America.  It seems like a total economic melt-down is a plausible way for it to happen too.

Who knows though, maybe a grassroots uprising like these students could lead to some productive discussions and some real change.  Let's hope.

 

"They always say the same thing; 'But evolution is only a theory!!' Which is true, I guess, and it's good they say that I think, it gives you hope that they feel the same about the theory of Gravity and they might just float the f**k away."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:First I heard

Vastet wrote:
First I heard of it. Not surprised. Rich better wise up soon, because the guillotine is getting closer with every year.

This is what kills me. You'd think that the study of history will always point out this. If you starve people to death they will turn on you.

And the stupid part of all this is that the vast majority of people protesting DONT want to end the free market, they simply want to end the abuse and monopolies.

This is what Beyond doesn't get. It is not that people want to "force" ANYONE. It is that people WILL do just the same as any other species. We are wired to do what we need to do to survive.

AND all this backlash CAN be avoided IF IF IF IF IF IF those at the top change their attitude. They should want to give DIRECTLY more hours, more pay and more benefits. Because if they did, the people they hurt would not be hurting and would not be seeking government help, much less protesting.

IT IS an attitude change I want from them, not an end to the open market.

If the pay gap keeps exploding, while profits keep exploding, while wages fall and hours get cut, they will only have themselves to blame.

An extraction market is what we have, and all it will do is produce MORE poverty and fewer jobs and lower wages.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10628
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
TonyZXT wrote:Curious what

TonyZXT wrote:
Curious what you mean by that?

History has repeatedly shown that there is a limit to how far the poor will accept being poor before they kill the rich in revolution. The line is hunger. When enough people are hungry enough, there will be revolt.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:AND all this

Brian37 wrote:

AND all this backlash CAN be avoided IF IF IF IF IF IF those at the top change their attitude. They should want to give DIRECTLY more hours, more pay and more benefits. Because if they did, the people they hurt would not be hurting and would not be seeking government help, much less protesting. 

The problem is, once you do it, the production costs will rise, prices will rise to keep the profit and people will again have less buying power. Even if the businessmen aren't greedy, they must be, to survive in the competition and expensive workforce. Only strong corporations can withstand that, not small businessmen. The word is competition and capability of competition. Why should government sponsor bloodshed of economic gladiators? Who asked these employees, if that is what they want to do, to fight all day long against other corporations? 

This reminds me of one horror story of Clive Barker, In the hills, the cities.

I could bet that not even the master writer of horror never had imagined such an economically-social interpretation of his story Smiling

Brian37 wrote:
 IT IS an attitude change I want from them, not an end to the open market.

If the pay gap keeps exploding, while profits keep exploding, while wages fall and hours get cut, they will only have themselves to blame.

An extraction market is what we have, and all it will do is produce MORE poverty and fewer jobs and lower wages.

Yes, the people out there don't want an end of the free market. But do we have a free market, if a few individuals dictate the prices of basic commodities? Just remember the guy who bought most of global cacao, if not all of it. The market may seem free to us, but it's not for the countries that produce the food and have to sell it for ransom prices or have nobody to buy it. There is certainly a necessary change of attitude, like use local products and services at all costs. But that won't work without legal changes of attitude, like embargos keeping cheap foreign shit from destroying local quality producers, who feel responsible to their customers.

The problem is greed, caused by people's insecurity and scarcity of basic needs. That's why people try to become more rich, because it feels good to be secure and they will try to overthrow any limits between them and senseless competition for way too more wealth than they need. That's why they produce useless shit in every turn of monetary treadmill. The surest way to become rich is to hire other people to run in the treadmill for you, but that doesn't solve anything.

I'm not against a free market, competition and whatsoever. But I want it strictly divided from living. Just like you want separation of Church and state. Losing a game of basketball won't cost you the house, so why losing a game of 9-5 office paperwork will, when it's not even fun anyway? A game is a game. Non-players shouldn't be punished and in the end, even the winners of the game have to put their chips, jettons and paper money back into the box.
And people shouldn't gamble with things that we need for living or that can't be replaced, like food, water, metals, fossil fuels and other resources. 3 meals a day and a roof overhead (I mean your own, doctor's and school's roofs) should be basic human right, exercised by local authorities, who will receive all locally taken taxes except the indirect like VAT... But that's just a small technical detail, on the way to resource-based economy.

 

Vastet wrote:
TonyZXT wrote:
Curious what you mean by that?
History has repeatedly shown that there is a limit to how far the poor will accept being poor before they kill the rich in revolution. The line is hunger. When enough people are hungry enough, there will be revolt.
Yep, but there is a way to surprise even the history. What about a revolt, but an intelligent and peaceful one? Just people reorganizing themselves, reshaping the society? Of course, with lots of yelling, chanting, clapping, stomping and other enthusiastic noise, but without such bullshit as "we will get you to accept the declaration of civil and human rights for life, even if we should cut your head off with guillotine."

 Just like the people of Iceland did it a couple of years ago. After their bankers and politicians made extreme debts, the citizens got pissed off. They refused to pay the debts, they threw the politicians out of the government and chased the bankers out of the country by Interpol. Then they universally elected a new government out of commoners and created a their own new constitution. (they had a copy of Denmark's before) 
So you see, it's possible. People today can really behave differently. You just won't hear about it on TV.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10628
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
A political revolt in

A political revolt in Iceland is a big step away from revolt in the US. There are so many more factors to consider. Even in Canada it would take drastic measures. The systems are set up so as to be almost redundant to a degree. It almost doesn't matter who takes power simply because that power is split between multiple branches of government. In order to really get dirty and scrape 200 odd years of irrelevance and bs off the books you would need a major majority in every branch of the government. Which takes a very large number of people just to man, let alone to get enough support to be elected.
It is rather ironic that the very measures taken to prevent the rise of a monarchy or dictatorship are now the biggest obstacles to reforming policies.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10628
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
While it isn't necessarily

While it isn't necessarily impossible to achieve, I rather doubt enough people will form a party capable of fixing all the bs, AND gain enough respect and support from the people to actually accomplish the changes necessary to prevent a violent uprising before shit hits the fan. Canada, having four parties (that cross political spectrums) with each having (however remote) a chance of forming government, MIGHT be able to pull it off if a party goes the right way. The US, with only two viable parties (with little variance in political spectrum), is not in a position to do so at this time. It is more likely that the nations would break up than come together.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
(No subject)

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:I'm not

Luminon wrote:

I'm not against a free market, competition and whatsoever. But I want it strictly divided from living. Just like you want separation of Church and state. Losing a game of basketball won't cost you the house, so why losing a game of 9-5 office paperwork will, when it's not even fun anyway? A game is a game. Non-players shouldn't be punished and in the end, even the winners of the game have to put their chips, jettons and paper money back into the box.
And people shouldn't gamble with things that we need for living or that can't be replaced, like food, water, metals, fossil fuels and other resources. 3 meals a day and a roof overhead (I mean your own, doctor's and school's roofs) should be basic human right, exercised by local authorities, who will receive all locally taken taxes except the indirect like VAT... But that's just a small technical detail, on the way to resource-based economy.

That was the idea behind the safety net of the welfare state with things like food stamps and public housing. But over time, it has only made the problem of poverty and food security worse because there was no mandatory birth control, work or education required to receive benefits. It just created a permanent underclass of people that exchange free welfare benefits for votes. Food stamps just create more demand, driving the price up.

I agree with some of their points. The system is setup so the rich get richer without any work or hiring workers because we allow the rich to buy up land and commodities produced without any production. They blame the banks for taking advantage of the working poor, but this is really a symptom rather than a direct cause. You can stop banks from loaning to the poor, but they'll still be poor.

The protesters don't seem to be demanding that the unemployed get trained for the jobs that are available. Demanding that the education system get fixed. They seem to be OK with letting people take advantage of the welfare system which is just as much a problem as anything. Why don't they address the greed of people that have children they can't take care of?

Is there ever going to be a political movement to get rid of free welfare for both the rich and the poor? These protesters are still in favor of 'something for nothing', they just want it to go to a different group of people. So how are they any different than corporate lobbyists?

 

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:That was the idea

EXC wrote:

That was the idea behind the safety net of the welfare state with things like food stamps and public housing. But over time, it has only made the problem of poverty and food security worse because there was no mandatory birth control, work or education required to receive benefits. It just created a permanent underclass of people that exchange free welfare benefits for votes. Food stamps just create more demand, driving the price up.

Right, this can not work in the current system, where not having to work and passively consuming entertainment is seen as desirable.
Such a real freedom (being basically taken care of) requires many changes of the culture itself. Not only widely available contraception, but also educating and organizing people to spend their free time actively and constructively. A good example would be the psychologic assesment of personality, as for what are the people good at and what education should they choose. 
Without the burden of monetary system, local authorities could stop doing so much paperwork and instead get in charge of a local community, then go and repair something together, build stuff or clean up the nature around. That would be a whole new culture, a different thing from 9-5 work and the rest of day spent in front of TV. We can see that in village cultural festivals in some regions, but that won't spread as long as people have to run in the treadmill.

EXC wrote:
 I agree with some of their points. The system is setup so the rich get richer without any work or hiring workers because we allow the rich to buy up land and commodities produced without any production. They blame the banks for taking advantage of the working poor, but this is really a symptom rather than a direct cause. You can stop banks from loaning to the poor, but they'll still be poor.

The protesters don't seem to be demanding that the unemployed get trained for the jobs that are available. Demanding that the education system get fixed. They seem to be OK with letting people take advantage of the welfare system which is just as much a problem as anything. Why don't they address the greed of people that have children they can't take care of?

Is there ever going to be a political movement to get rid of free welfare for both the rich and the poor? These protesters are still in favor of 'something for nothing', they just want it to go to a different group of people. So how are they any different than corporate lobbyists? 

 

There's nothing wrong about receiving a welfare, per se. Goods and services must be somehow delivered to the people who need them. 

The question is, do we need the imaginary entity of money between the producer and the consumer? Do we need it to grow limitlessly through interest and speculation? Do we appreciate, that it pretty much causes most of crimes and corrupts people's morality?
Money was a great invention that made a lot of things possible, it was a kind of value transporter, when goods couldn't be transported physically. But its usefulness today is gone, because we have globalization, transport, communication... It took a life of it's own, more like weather and now in addition to natural disasters we have financial earthquakes, hurricanes, floods and droughts. 

What these people want is to decrease the power of money and commercialism in the society. No, money don't have to be immediately erased off Earth, but they must be immediately sterilized. When creating a biological weapon, the worst thing you can do is to give it an ability to procreate freely. Which is basically what Wall Street and all the stock markets do, they move enormous amounts of money all around the world and make even more money and so on. In terms of nature, it is like a machine creating catastrophes on purpose. Actions of a few gamblers on stock markets can destroy whole governments by manipulating key commodities, specially the weaker ones. There is no good reason for such a power to exist. It's much more dangerous than nuclear weapons.

Commercialism causes things to be done wrong and expensive on purpose. Things are imported from overseas because their monetary value is low and local producers are destroyed, because their monetary value is high. The reality is, monetary value is imaginary. This demand-supply story is bullshit, 50% of the price is pure speculation. In reality, the overseas production is extremely expensive in terms of natural resources and human labor, while local producers are cheap, in ecology, labour and transport and they don't live like illiterate Chinese slaves. As I wrote elsewhere, countries like Germany, Switzerland and Britain prefer local producers, regardless of their monetary prices. They do it to defend their local economy and out of patriotism.

So when you say that people need to get educated, instructed for jobs and so on you're right, but that's still not the problem. The problem is, what are we living for? What is the purpose in our lives? Is it making profit?

Nope. The economy (and government, etc) is a machine to take care of people, as long as it is more efficient ( "economic" ) to do it collectively on a given scale, like global, national, regional, etc. It is an absolute bullshit to gamble with economies, connect them, pump money and resources out of one into others, destroy them and exploit them for personal profit. Every region or city should be maximally self-sufficient and not interfere with self-sufficiency of other regions. What can be spent locally, should be spent locally. If not, it should be sent freely to regions that lack the resources, not to compete and destroy other such producers in other regions. You get the idea. 

So what do we want to live for? Let's say we want live to make the best out of ourselves, have fun and live in harmony with other folks. That way we can erase huge wasteful, useless industries and sections of society, which don't help us achieve that goal. That way we can save a lot of resources, invest them wisely and make everything efficient and therefore cheap. After that, even the universal welfare you're so afraid of will cost almost nothing. The price of everything today is enormous, because as I said, things are done wrong, because our purposes, our priorities are all wrong and everything is built as wasteful as possible, to serve the wrong purpose.
All these protesters out there want the society to serve a good purpose. Some know it, some just feel it, because they don't have the right words, like I do. But that's nothing a bit of education couldn't fix.

Are there any problems with my reasoning? You're so good at spotting them.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Brian37

Luminon wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

AND all this backlash CAN be avoided IF IF IF IF IF IF those at the top change their attitude. They should want to give DIRECTLY more hours, more pay and more benefits. Because if they did, the people they hurt would not be hurting and would not be seeking government help, much less protesting. 

The problem is, once you do it, the production costs will rise, prices will rise to keep the profit and people will again have less buying power. Even if the businessmen aren't greedy, they must be, to survive in the competition and expensive workforce. Only strong corporations can withstand that, not small businessmen. The word is competition and capability of competition. Why should government sponsor bloodshed of economic gladiators? Who asked these employees, if that is what they want to do, to fight all day long against other corporations? 

This reminds me of one horror story of Clive Barker, In the hills, the cities.

I could bet that not even the master writer of horror never had imagined such an economically-social interpretation of his story Smiling

Brian37 wrote:
 IT IS an attitude change I want from them, not an end to the open market.

If the pay gap keeps exploding, while profits keep exploding, while wages fall and hours get cut, they will only have themselves to blame.

An extraction market is what we have, and all it will do is produce MORE poverty and fewer jobs and lower wages.

Yes, the people out there don't want an end of the free market. But do we have a free market, if a few individuals dictate the prices of basic commodities? Just remember the guy who bought most of global cacao, if not all of it. The market may seem free to us, but it's not for the countries that produce the food and have to sell it for ransom prices or have nobody to buy it. There is certainly a necessary change of attitude, like use local products and services at all costs. But that won't work without legal changes of attitude, like embargos keeping cheap foreign shit from destroying local quality producers, who feel responsible to their customers.

The problem is greed, caused by people's insecurity and scarcity of basic needs. That's why people try to become more rich, because it feels good to be secure and they will try to overthrow any limits between them and senseless competition for way too more wealth than they need. That's why they produce useless shit in every turn of monetary treadmill. The surest way to become rich is to hire other people to run in the treadmill for you, but that doesn't solve anything.

I'm not against a free market, competition and whatsoever. But I want it strictly divided from living. Just like you want separation of Church and state. Losing a game of basketball won't cost you the house, so why losing a game of 9-5 office paperwork will, when it's not even fun anyway? A game is a game. Non-players shouldn't be punished and in the end, even the winners of the game have to put their chips, jettons and paper money back into the box.
And people shouldn't gamble with things that we need for living or that can't be replaced, like food, water, metals, fossil fuels and other resources. 3 meals a day and a roof overhead (I mean your own, doctor's and school's roofs) should be basic human right, exercised by local authorities, who will receive all locally taken taxes except the indirect like VAT... But that's just a small technical detail, on the way to resource-based economy.

 

Vastet wrote:
TonyZXT wrote:
Curious what you mean by that?
History has repeatedly shown that there is a limit to how far the poor will accept being poor before they kill the rich in revolution. The line is hunger. When enough people are hungry enough, there will be revolt.
Yep, but there is a way to surprise even the history. What about a revolt, but an intelligent and peaceful one? Just people reorganizing themselves, reshaping the society? Of course, with lots of yelling, chanting, clapping, stomping and other enthusiastic noise, but without such bullshit as "we will get you to accept the declaration of civil and human rights for life, even if we should cut your head off with guillotine."

 Just like the people of Iceland did it a couple of years ago. After their bankers and politicians made extreme debts, the citizens got pissed off. They refused to pay the debts, they threw the politicians out of the government and chased the bankers out of the country by Interpol. Then they universally elected a new government out of commoners and created a their own new constitution. (they had a copy of Denmark's before) 
So you see, it's possible. People today can really behave differently. You just won't hear about it on TV.

OF COURSE production costs go up, duh. BUT, what does not have to happen is labor being cut or the price going up. What has NOT happen but could happen, is that you CAN simply being the shareholder or CEO take less of a cut to insure the stability of the labor and the buying power of the labor.

AGAIN what WILL HAPPEN is not what has to happen and it all depends on ATTITUDE CHANGE.

I doubt very seriously if those at the top get less and get taxed more will starve to death. "Cant, and don't want to, are two different things".

 If those at the top truely cared they would invest here and pay well here and take care of the workers HERE. I do not think we should give China one fucking dime considering that they have a police of slave labor and cheating over valuing their money and undercutting our currency. They are nothing but loan sharks.

If you make 30 mill, and put 15 mill back into the workers, don't expect me to cry for you if all you have left over is 15 mill.

SHIT even 1 mill. If you took 500k and put it back into the workers, there STILL is not one place in America that you could not live comfortably off 500k.

I don't care. Prices rise in our current market, not because of the consumer having a say, prices rise because the competition is at the marketing shareholder level. It is whatever the market can get away with. If it were a healthy consumer driven market  what we have now wouldn't have happened and prices would not be so lopsided and would be more manageable as a ratio to the cost of living.

I've seen EVERYTHING go up while the product shrinks. I've seen my bosses profits go up, WHILE my hours get cut DISPITE his increase in profits. It is not a fair market or a competitive market. It is an exploiative market.

What you are telling me IS CORRECT in our current climate of attitude. What I am telling you is that if the people at the top DONT change their attitude, THEY will end up getting what they want in cheap labor and create another India and China here. That may be their idea of competition, but it will never be mine.

The problem is that while short term it will make some richer, the more the climate starves people to death and makes them slaves to work, the more the people will hate the environment they live in.

The rich in this country need to CARE and they've tried the hording tactic and successfully sold fear to maintain their monopoly, but it will not last, not here in this country. People here will not put up with slave wages or starving. If they think the success of this country depends on those in the middle and bottom worker longer hours for less and less and no health care, they are sadly mistaken and long term it WILL come back to bite them in the ass.

My boss falsely thinks that by cutting my hours it will motivate me to work harder. I WAS ALREADY WORKING HARD. All he is doing is making excuses to sit on his money. Starving me doesn't motivate me, IT FUCKING PISSES ME OFF.

He didn't have to cut my hours, he wanted to. If he can afford a second house and an Audi, he can afford to keep the hours he was giving me to keep me stable.

When I had the hours I needed I was much more motivated. He's simply pissed that I am not buying into his bullshit. He wants my loyalty, and the way he shows it to me is to fuck me over?

The American worker WANTS TO WORK HARD, we simply don't want to be slaves or be treated like mere machine parts or numbers on a page.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Washington DC follows!

 

Are any of you close to Washington DC? You might want to check out the Freedom Plaza! I'd love to be there with you.

 

HIGH PRIORITY

TZM GLOBAL RADIO | OCT 5TH 2011, 4PM EDT

Host: Peter Joseph

Guests:

Dennis Trainor, Jr 

COALITION TO OCCUPY FREEDOM PLAZA

http://october2011.org/ 

Brian Phillips

OCCUPY WALL STREET

https://occupywallst.org/

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/zmglobal/2011/10/05/oct-5th-11-host-peter-joseph-tzm-global-radio

Discussing the growing "Financial Occupation; its importance and how TZM can strategically get involved. The Zeitgeist Movement stands in

solidarity with these grassroots, non-violence awareness actions for they may represent the beginning of a global move away from the

Monetary Paradigm. The Revolution is Now.

OCTOBER2011 COALITION TO OCCUPY FREEDOM PLAZA PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

September 26, 2011

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

Kevin Zeese, 301-996-6582

Margaret Flowers, 443-759-4635

Maria Allwine, 443-762-0892

press@october2011.org

OCTOBER2011 COALITION TO OCCUPY FREEDOM PLAZA ?IN WASHINGTON, DC

BEGINNING OCT 6th

DC Occupation Marks the 11th Year of Afghan War, Austerity Budgets and Builds on ?Arab Spring, European Summer, Madison and Occupation

of Wall Street

The People’s Uprisings seen around the world and in the United States come to Washington, DC’s Freedom Plaza beginning on Thursday, October 6 when thousands will converge to begin a prolonged people's occupation of Freedom Plaza.  The October2011 Movement involves thousands of people and 150 organizations who have already signed. The DC occupation comes at a pivotal time: the beginning of the 11th year of war in Afghanistan and a new federal fiscal year that promises austerity of everything except weapons and war.

The Freedom Plaza occupation occurs as activists in New York are occupying Wall Street and follows major protests across the Midwest against austerity budgets, the environmental protest of the Tar Sands Pipeline where more than 1,200 were arrested and protests throughout the United States on a wide range of issues. The October2011 Movement demands that the government represent the people, not just the top 1%. The pledge signed on by thousands calls for using our resources on human needs and environmental protection, not for war and exploitation. October2011.org stands with super

majorities of Americans on seven key issues: 

Tax the rich and corporations

End the wars, bring the troops home, cut military spending

Protect the social safety net, strengthen Social Security and improved Medicare for all

End corporate welfare for oil companies and other big business interests

Transition to a clean energy economy, reverse environmental degradation

Protect worker rights including collective bargaining, create jobs and raise wages

Get money out of politics

Among those signing the pledge and participating in the action are Ann Wright, Baldemar Velasquez, Chris Hedges, Coleen Rowley, Cornel West, Cynthia McKinney, Ray McGovern, Sibel Edmonds and Ted Rall.

The Freedom Plaza occupation builds on the experiences of Egypt, Tunisia, Greece and Spain.  October2011 has joined with the Egyptian revolutionary movement in a solidarity statement based on four common principles:  seeking real democracy, an end to U.S. interventionist military policy, protection of human rights through the rule of law and developing a sustainable economy that meets human needs.  The Indignados of Spain have described our common Road to Dignity that includes the occupation of Wall Street and Freedom Plaza.

More information visit FAQ  on http://october2011.org.  

 

The occupation of Freedom Plaza is almost here! Momentum is really building and we can’t wait to be with you in Washington, DC. The time is now to create an independent movement built on participatory democracy and to demand an end to war and that our resources are used to meet human and environmental needs.

Occupy Wall Street continues and has sparked occupations all around the country. Some have already started and many others will begin this Saturday. The people of OccupyDC will join us on Thursday. Please support these local occupations. The time is now to unite as the 99% and work in solidarity. You can find out more at OccupyTogether.org.

 

We know that many of you are on your way to DC. Some are coming on foot, some on bicycle and others by plane, train and caravan. Please document your trip to DC and share your stories, photos and videos with us. 

When you arrive in Freedom Plaza, there will be many ways for you to be engaged. You can join a committee and work on one of the 15 core crises. Committees start meeting on Friday afternoon and will present their work in the nightly assemblies. You can share your artistic talents in the Arts area of the Plaza. You can also sign up to teach a class or workshop – share your knowledge and skills so that others understand more about the crises we face, solutions to them and skills needed to create a new world that is peaceful, just and sustainable.  

Prior to the action next week there will be training sessions in Washington, DC for skills in nonviolent action, peacekeeping and legal observation. Check the Calendar for more information (click on the topic for details) or check the Daily Schedule. We hope that you will volunteer in some way while in Freedom Plaza!  

Many of us have spent time in Liberty Square with the people of Occupy Wall Street. We are impressed by the great sense of community and possibility. We look forward to building a similar participatory, educational, creative and respectful community in Freedom Plaza. One person summed it up by saying the atmosphere is one of less social networking and more socializing!  

However, for those of you who can’t make it to Freedom Plaza in Washington, DC, please follow along virtually. We will livestream the nightly assemblies and other events. We will also post articles, photos and videos at October2011.org regularly. And we encourage you to be the media also!  

In peace and solidarity!

The October2011 Team

 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Such a real

Luminon wrote:

Such a real freedom (being basically taken care of) requires many changes of the culture itself. Not only widely available contraception,

 

It is widely available, it's getting people to use it. The people that claim they can't afford contraception all seem to be able to afford cable TV, cell phones, cigarettes, liquor, etc... So the only question is this: Is society going to force these people to be responsible in order to recieve welfare benefits or is just going to be a free entitlement?

What you don't seem to get is that there needs to be a coorelation between responsible behavior and biological sucess. Is there any Darwinian advantage to getting an education, a good paying job and not having many children? No, not the way the welfare state is set up now. So shouldn't we expect a lot of irresponsible behavior if this is what works?

Luminon wrote:

but also educating and organizing people to spend their free time actively and constructively. A good example would be the psychologic assesment of personality, as for what are the people good at and what education should they choose. 

 

Reforming the education system, but this means taking on the teachers unions and the administrations. The system is designed to provide job and pension security for teachers, administrators and text book printers. Not solve our unemployment problem.
 

Luminon wrote:

Without the burden of monetary system, local authorities could stop doing so much paperwork and instead get in charge of a local community, then go and repair something together, build stuff or clean up the nature around. That would be a whole new culture, a different thing from 9-5 work and the rest of day spent in front of TV. We can see that in village cultural festivals in some regions, but that won't spread as long as people have to run in the treadmill.

I'd don't know what this means. What do you want to the government to force people to do or not do? To me, Government = use of deadly force, so translate it into what I understand.

 

Luminon wrote:

There's nothing wrong about receiving a welfare, per se. Goods and services must be somehow delivered to the people who need them. 

It's a moral hazard, unconditional welfare is a bailout for people's bad decisions. So the just keep making the same bad decisions generation after generation.

The economy is about producing goods and services as well. The theory of food stamps is that people can't afford food so we pay for it. But the price of food is supply and demand. So it's running on a treadmill that keeps going faster, create more demand without increasing supply. This drives up prices.

Luminon wrote:

The question is, do we need the imaginary entity of money between the producer and the consumer? Do we need it to grow limitlessly through interest and speculation? Do we appreciate, that it pretty much causes most of crimes and corrupts people's morality?
Money was a great invention that made a lot of things possible, it was a kind of value transporter, when goods couldn't be transported physically. But its usefulness today is gone, because we have globalization, transport, communication... It took a life of it's own, more like weather and now in addition to natural disasters we have financial earthquakes, hurricanes, floods and droughts. 

What money does is prevent someone that does not contribute to production from taking more than they put into the economy. Now I agree the system is broken, but do you have a better system to keep people from receiving a free lunch every day? Until you do, money is the way to go.

Luminon wrote:

What these people want is to decrease the power of money and commercialism in the society. No, money don't have to be immediately erased off Earth, but they must be immediately sterilized. When creating a biological weapon, the worst thing you can do is to give it an ability to procreate freely. Which is basically what Wall Street and all the stock markets do, they move enormous amounts of money all around the world and make even more money and so on. In terms of nature, it is like a machine creating catastrophes on purpose. Actions of a few gamblers on stock markets can destroy whole governments by manipulating key commodities, specially the weaker ones. There is no good reason for such a power to exist. It's much more dangerous than nuclear weapons.

Commercialism causes things to be done wrong and expensive on purpose. Things are imported from overseas because their monetary value is low and local producers are destroyed, because their monetary value is high. The reality is, monetary value is imaginary. This demand-supply story is bullshit, 50% of the price is pure speculation. In reality, the overseas production is extremely expensive in terms of natural resources and human labor, while local producers are cheap, in ecology, labour and transport and they don't live like illiterate Chinese slaves. As I wrote elsewhere, countries like Germany, Switzerland and Britain prefer local producers, regardless of their monetary prices. They do it to defend their local economy and out of patriotism.

So when you say that people need to get educated, instructed for jobs and so on you're right, but that's still not the problem. The problem is, what are we living for? What is the purpose in our lives? Is it making profit?

Nope. The economy (and government, etc) is a machine to take care of people, as long as it is more efficient ( "economic" ) to do it collectively on a given scale, like global, national, regional, etc. It is an absolute bullshit to gamble with economies, connect them, pump money and resources out of one into others, destroy them and exploit them for personal profit. Every region or city should be maximally self-sufficient and not interfere with self-sufficiency of other regions. What can be spent locally, should be spent locally. If not, it should be sent freely to regions that lack the resources, not to compete and destroy other such producers in other regions. You get the idea. 

So what do we want to live for? Let's say we want live to make the best out of ourselves, have fun and live in harmony with other folks. That way we can erase huge wasteful, useless industries and sections of society, which don't help us achieve that goal. That way we can save a lot of resources, invest them wisely and make everything efficient and therefore cheap. After that, even the universal welfare you're so afraid of will cost almost nothing. The price of everything today is enormous, because as I said, things are done wrong, because our purposes, our priorities are all wrong and everything is built as wasteful as possible, to serve the wrong purpose.
All these protesters out there want the society to serve a good purpose. Some know it, some just feel it, because they don't have the right words, like I do. But that's nothing a bit of education couldn't fix.

Are there any problems with my reasoning? You're so good at spotting them.

Please translate this in the language of 'Government = deadly force'.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
Alternative money

Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote: It is widely

EXC wrote:
 It is widely available, it's getting people to use it. The people that claim they can't afford contraception all seem to be able to afford cable TV, cell phones, cigarettes, liquor, etc... So the only question is this: Is society going to force these people to be responsible in order to recieve welfare benefits or is just going to be a free entitlement?

What you don't seem to get is that there needs to be a coorelation between responsible behavior and biological sucess. Is there any Darwinian advantage to getting an education, a good paying job and not having many children? No, not the way the welfare state is set up now. So shouldn't we expect a lot of irresponsible behavior if this is what works?

I agree, but the problem is with the state as it is today. The state is selfish and shares only with selfish people, like business mafia or mobs of gypsy lobbyists. A selfish state is not friendly to the real, new solutions, it wants to keep its secretive and bloated bureaucratic apparatus that soaks in money. What we need first is a transparent, responsible, efficiently utilitarian government, dedicated to serve the people, not itself. Then we can invent and apply all kinds of solutions.

For example, if some people can't hold all responsibility, they should not have all rights and freedoms. Such people only get spoilt by freedom. They need rules and regulations to keep them upright, no matter of their age. In case of maladapted and irresponsible groups or ethnicities (like gypsy tribes around here) it is fairly simple. Cut down welfare and instead move them to live in sort of a kibbutz with tough and authoritarian supervisors. There they can work, educate themselves and pursue traditional arts and culture. It would only need a small changes in legislative, like travel restrictions (do you know what happened in Canada?) and mild corporal punishment, if force is what they admire. 
 

EXC wrote:
 Reforming the education system, but this means taking on the teachers unions and the administrations. The system is designed to provide job and pension security for teachers, administrators and text book printers. Not solve our unemployment problem.
We can not follow market forces anymore. The change of system is not profitable, so what? In efficient government the money are spent on good purposes, thoughtfully formulated and transparently voted for by the informed and educated public, not because blind buying power compels us so, or lobbyists stuffed someone's pockets full of banknotes. The government has a plenty of opportunities to create meaningful jobs, except it doesn't want to, just yet. 

EXC wrote:
 I'd don't know what this means. What do you want to the government to force people to do or not do? To me, Government = use of deadly force, so translate it into what I understand.
No, I mean it as a kind of local activism. People from under the mayor or mayor himself should recruit and organize volunteer activists among locals and assign them to jobs. This is based on understanding your town as an extension of your kitchen or living room, something you should care about. It already works quite well with young people, if some fun program is arranged after the work.

Such a culture of local voluntary work for making the town better may sound utopian or cheesy. But it actually becomes very possible, once the government starts serving the people. People are hard workers, when it's for the common or greater good, it's fun and they don't have to worry about survival and making the financial ends meet. I know what I say, I've done some voluntary work this year myself. Even lazy folks work hard when surrounded by hard-working friends.  All you need is a few group leaders who can inspire people and entertain them. Plus some music on the background and a little refreshment during breaks. 

EXC wrote:

It's a moral hazard, unconditional welfare is a bailout for people's bad decisions. So the just keep making the same bad decisions generation after generation.

The economy is about producing goods and services as well. The theory of food stamps is that people can't afford food so we pay for it. But the price of food is supply and demand. So it's running on a treadmill that keeps going faster, create more demand without increasing supply. This drives up prices.


If welfare is moral hazard, then what are prices? Prices drive up prices. Money make money, that is the treadmill: You want money? Increase your prices. You want to buy something? Make money! Create an artificial demand by advertising, so people will buy more and you make money. 

This is where the price of food comes from. It is NOT supply and demand, it is a bubble of artificial demand. We just can not afford food stamps, when some businessmen gamble with the prices of food. If food is declared a strategic resource (strategic for benefit of the people) and distributed according to people's real needs, then this is the cheapest solution. Just give it to them, as much as they need, excluding absurd demands, of course.

EXC wrote:
 What money does is prevent someone that does not contribute to production from taking more than they put into the economy.
 Yeah, money maybe prevents a local hobo Joe Schmoe from taking an extra bread or wine bottle from the store. But it does not prevent the whole financial industry, which is a huge global parasite and contributes nothing at all. Last time I heard, the financial parasites got a huge bailout from Mr Obama that could have saved everyone's asses. So do money really prevent anything substantial?

EXC wrote:
Now I agree the system is broken, but do you have a better system to keep people from receiving a free lunch every day? Until you do, money is the way to go.
 In fact, I do. It's called Resource-based economy. Money are imaginary, resources are real. Therefore, resources are more important than money. Once we have a system of managing the resources better than through money, we can tell money goodbye. We can do it in one or more steps, like debt-free money and so on, but it changes nothing on the fact, that money are anachronism. RBE is diffcult to define, except as the utilitarian and scientific method applied on the problems of our daily living. This FAQ should answer many of your questions and doubts about daily aspects of living in RBE.

But tell me, why the hell people shouldn't receive a free lunch every day? Three normal-sized meals a day should be a basic human right! There is so much criminality, just because people are threatened by hunger. Criminality is not a curse from gods, it is an effect that has a cause. Design society in such a way that doesn't provoke criminality and you redirect almost all the resources from judges, the police and army into 3 meals a day and other modest basics of living that somehow seem so expensive and unreachable to you.

EXC wrote:

Please translate this in the language of 'Government = deadly force'.

Government is a good servant, but a bad master. Government is nothing more than a machine that does things which are more convenient that way, than if we should take care of them by ourselves. We forgot that the machine is ours, it was created by us and only we can keep it in check and make it serve us again. The machine was taken over by business lobbyists and mobs, in USA religious mob, here it's gypsy social welfare mob. I believe what is happening today is people starting to take the machine back, clean it and make it again work for their best interest, if it ever did that. 

 

 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

Brian, I am in full agreement with you that attitude change should happen. It should have happened decades ago.

 

BUT!

 

I don't think it will. If OSHA went away tommorow, your boss would not call in contractors to remove mandated safety stuff. However, when it gets old and less useful, I would bet that he would not get it fixed. Really, greed is one of the controlling facts for cultures in general.

 

As far as the hippies on Wall St go, remember that it is almost winter. Probably the best option for the financial industry at this point is to ignore them and wait them out. If they last the winter, then we might have a thing to deal with.

 

It will likely not be pretty. The tea party is much better armed than hippies are. The libertarians are also heavily armed but you have to sign a pledge not to participate in an actual revolution. If this thing turns into our very own arab spring, I would guess that the libertarians pledge thing goes out the door.

 

I would suggest a carry permit if you can get one. Pay attention to details here. .40S&W has a 95% one shor drop rate. .357 has a 98% one shot drop rate. Both have serious overpenetration issues. Tiny hole going in, gigantic hole going out and still lethal after the facr. You don't really want to tap a skinny ass crack head if there is a granny behind him.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Take a good look corporate

Take a good look corporate America, this is what happens when you are abusive and don't give a shit about whose pockets you pick or how you use the economy as your personal casino.

You better start giving a shit, otherwise you will have more and more people on your ass. And all I can say is YOU FUCKING DESERVE IT!

NOW please stop the pathetic fear mongering that somehow because people are getting wise to the exploitation market, that somehow that means society wants to end the free market.

 

NO! Most Americans simply want the abuse to stop and the pay gap and health care and cost of living to be less lopsided. THATS IT. And the only way to address that is to STOP CORPORATE WELFARE AND STOP THE ABUSE.

If all corporate America continues to not give a shit and continues to put profits above humans, they will only have themselves to blame for the backlash.

START paying a livable wage. START taking care of your workers. START investing back into NOT JUST JOBS, but jobs people can survive on. STOP the the profit padding and monopolies. Stop the outragious cost of health care that is nothing but profit driven. If you want people out of the EMERGANCY ROOM PROVIDE them with something even the poorist of the poor can afford.

BOTTOM LINE, START FUCKING CARING!

KUDOS to those in these protests. It is way past time the middle class and poor stood up to the abuse of the top. IT IS CLASS WARFARE AND AS BUFFET RIGHTFULLY POINTED OUT, the top is winning.

BUT what they do not understand is that this type of winning is nothing but cheating and will blow up in their faces long term because the more poverty this system creates the less the top can sell to the very poor they create.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote: I agree, but

Luminon wrote:

 I agree, but the problem is with the state as it is today. The state is selfish and shares only with selfish people, like business mafia or mobs of gypsy lobbyists. A selfish state is not friendly to the real, new solutions, it wants to keep its secretive and bloated bureaucratic apparatus that soaks in money.

 

And what have you ever done or any of the protesters done that is unselfish. There's the problem, we're not capable of being unselfish, the best you can do is try to shame people for being self interested. The answer is to apply science to the problems, and since I believe science tells us were all 100% self-interested, what we have to do is build a society with win-win agreements.

 

Luminon wrote:

What we need first is a transparent, responsible, efficiently utilitarian government, dedicated to serve the people, not itself. Then we can invent and apply all kinds of solutions.

But the people in the government are all 100% self-serving. So how is this possible?

The only way I see to do this is for taxation to be seen as irrational. Citizens should demand that the government only take money for services delivered. In the current system, politicians view taxation as their right and most people just go along with this.

 

Luminon wrote:

 No, I mean it as a kind of local activism. People from under the mayor or mayor himself should recruit and organize volunteer activists among locals and assign them to jobs. This is based on understanding your town as an extension of your kitchen or living room, something you should care about. It already works quite well with young people, if some fun program is arranged after the work.

Such a culture of local voluntary work for making the town better may sound utopian or cheesy. But it actually becomes very possible, once the government starts serving the people. People are hard workers, when it's for the common or greater good, it's fun and they don't have to worry about survival and making the financial ends meet. I know what I say, I've done some voluntary work this year myself. Even lazy folks work hard when surrounded by hard-working friends.  All you need is a few group leaders who can inspire people and entertain them. Plus some music on the background and a little refreshment during breaks. 

Who is going to pay the bill for all this? These people have to eat and have a roof over their heads. This volunteer work isn't going to increase food production. And what about the people that refuse to work or study much?

Luminon wrote:

If food is declared a strategic resource (strategic for benefit of the people) and distributed according to people's real needs, then this is the cheapest solution. Just give it to them, as much as they need, excluding absurd demands, of course.

Then what gives the producers more incentive to produce? You take everything they produce, so they just stop. If you don't work, you just get free stuff. This is insane. A sure route to widespread famine.

 

Luminon wrote:

 But it does not prevent the whole financial industry, which is a huge global parasite and contributes nothing at all. Last time I heard, the financial parasites got a huge bailout from Mr Obama that could have saved everyone's asses. So do money really prevent anything substantial?

I don't like seeing the predatory loans either. But they are a symptom of poverty not a cause. They're vultures that eat the carcases but they didn't cause it.

What we need is a way to get people on the edge of poverty into job training programs. Provide them with some aid for a limited time. But they would need to agree to have their lives be managed by the job training companies. Kind of like entering the military, but where they are forced to be disiplined until they get out of poverty.

 

Luminon wrote:

In fact, I do. It's called Resource-based economy. Money are imaginary, resources are real. Therefore, resources are more important than money. Once we have a system of managing the resources better than through money, we can tell money goodbye. We can do it in one or more steps, like debt-free money and so on, but it changes nothing on the fact, that money are anachronism. RBE is diffcult to define, except as the utilitarian and scientific method applied on the problems of our daily living. This FAQ should answer many of your questions and doubts about daily aspects of living in RBE.

I actually agree that is wrong to allow natural resources to be owned by anyone. Most conservatives are hypocrites because the present system allows people to get rich just by owning land, oil drilling rights, etc... It is destructive to the work ethic they so highly tout. When I argue with conservatives, they call be a communist, when I argue with leftists, they call me a right wing nut.

To me this group is just as bad as wall street. They all want a free lunch and special rights, and the subject of mandatory birth control is taboo. We're going to have economic problems and conflict until these are addressed.

Luminon wrote:

But tell me, why the hell people shouldn't receive a free lunch every day? Three normal-sized meals a day should be a basic human right!

Because someone has to work to make the lunch. If you don't compensate the people that do this, they stop. You just get more and more people looking for the free lunch and less people willing to make it.

Also the planet has limited land and water. So you'd need to limit population growth, even if you miraculously had enough workers willing to work for free.

Luminon wrote:

 Government is a good servant, but a bad master. Government is nothing more than a machine that does things which are more convenient that way, than if we should take care of them by ourselves. We forgot that the machine is ours, it was created by us and only we can keep it in check and make it serve us again. The machine was taken over by business lobbyists and mobs, in USA religious mob, here it's gypsy social welfare mob. I believe what is happening today is people starting to take the machine back, clean it and make it again work for their best interest, if it ever did that.  

Still need a translation. How is deadly force to be used?

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

This is a potential large update. I am a short train ride from there and a bunch of tea party/combat seasoned veterans are gearing up to head down there.

 

I lack info on whether they are organizing on the internet for a mulitcity thing. Even so, weapons in general are banned in NYC. A while back I came close to a collision with NYC cops over having too large of a flashlight. What saved me was that I was wearing Klingon ridges at the time. NYC cops don't like to see even a hint of a chance of violence.

 

Basically, the heavily armed pissed off party is headed down there. The cops will not be pleased and neither of them much care for hippies. The cops have already used tear gas a few times.

 

Keep an eye on this one because the chance of a possible three way battle now exists.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I am so happy to see the

I am so happy to see the backlash. It is about time the uber rich face the fact that they are not the only class with rights in the world. When Warren Buffet admits that it is lopsided, the rich have no fucking excuse.

I so fucking sick of the false analogy that when the middle or poor say "help, stop making it harder on us" that somehow we want to end the open market.

ENOUGH bullshit.

There SHOULD always be room for whatever an individual wants in life. But life is never a script and "happiness" is not dependent on one class, but collective stability.

Pointing out the lopsided nature of money controlling politics and the pay gap not keeping up with the cost of living is not a demand to end the open market.

GO PROTESTERS!

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote: And what have

EXC wrote:
 And what have you ever done or any of the protesters done that is unselfish. There's the problem, we're not capable of being unselfish, the best you can do is try to shame people for being self interested. The answer is to apply science to the problems, and since I believe science tells us were all 100% self-interested, what we have to do is build a society with win-win agreements.
This is not a question of unselfishness (see the next paragraph), but one of a law or right. A government is an institution meant to care for people. It belongs to the 99% of society that needs its services, that's what democracy and constitution is about. Then here comes this rich and powerful 1% minority and steals the government away. It is our right to take it back, only we have to do it ourselves. Once we do it, we can apply the political will to apply the science. RBE is the science applied to our problems, it has blueprints of solutions with the technology we already have for decades.

EXC wrote:
 But the people in the government are all 100% self-serving. So how is this possible?
Self-serving does not have to mean immoral, selfish, evil or greedy or otherwise naughty. In our current government it does, but because this is not an "enlightened" self-interest.

Enlightened self-interest is in seeing ourselves as parts of a greater whole and cooperating with the whole gives better results than living on detriment of the whole. (which includes things like good relationships which do wonderful things with quality of life) This is known as the prisoner's dilemma and comes with a mathemathical proof. Those most "greedy" prisoners get most rewarded for full cooperation with other prisoners. The problem is, that not all people are "enlightened" in their self-interest or good at mathemathics or willing to give up their comfortable status quo. Specially not the 1%. 

Our biological nature did not teach us to see this far. But what makes us human is the power to overcome our genetic programming and even act directly against it. If you doubt it, read Maslow's study of human motivation and then Dawkins' the Selfish gene. These two books would perhaps change your notions about motivation and selfishness, which are I think simplistic and counter-productive. You sometimes sound almost like an anti-Darwinian creationist propaganda Smiling 

EXC wrote:
 The only way I see to do this is for taxation to be seen as irrational. Citizens should demand that the government only take money for services delivered. In the current system, politicians view taxation as their right and most people just go along with this.
Why take money only for services delivered? There is a danger of decreasing the services. The less we pay, the less services we receive, but it's us who need the services, not the government. The government can live comfortably on minimal taxes and copious bribes from corporations.

But we can't keep paying for nothing either. Don't blame the messenger, taxes are here, because if we just pay government to do something for us, then it's more practical and cheaper than if we'd do it ourselves. The problem is not in taxes, it's in government and how, why and for what are the money used. Firstly, most of the money go all the way long to the central or federal government. There are loses. They concentrate in huge pool of funds, called budget. There the loses are extremely huge, because everyone on the top take as much as they can get away with. Mostly on purposes that do not serve the taxpayers in any way or are misleading. Then the rest of money again trickles all the way down in form of public services, which may be badly and blindly applied, for example, indiscriminate use of welfare money. 

The taxes are not bad, it's what we do with them. And this we can change. Almost all taxes, specially direct ones should stay in the city, town, group of towns or region in which they were taken. Taxes should be progressive. We arrived poor to this world and poor we shall depart, so there's no reason why people should die overly rich. Therefore, progressive taxation and banning of tax paradises. The local authorities will be directly responsible to their people for using the taxes to sponsor local hospitals, schools and retirement houses. If not, a mayor might get his car keyed and tires pierced, if he doesn't behave responsibly.

Plus, the advent of Resource-based economy will make it all even more efficiently and locally responsibly organized.

EXC wrote:
 Who is going to pay the bill for all this? These people have to eat and have a roof over their heads. This volunteer work isn't going to increase food production. And what about the people that refuse to work or study much?
For the purpose of this examples, the volunteers are locals, so they have roofs over their heads. Also, if we take taxes progressively and keep them locally, there will be enough money for such enterprises. Such things aren't expensive, I've worked together with 20 people for a week and all what the organizers had to do was to buy food (we cooked it ourselves) and lend us a bathroom. (and some work tools of course) The food was very simple, but usually edible and rather cheap. None of us had to pay anything. The money it took to feed us are nothing compared to daily expenses at the city or municipal office, when people ask for fundings... (I know that, I'm an intern there now)

Furthermore, this is a non-issue in agriculture, which is almost all mechanized today. Only a tiny fraction of people work in agriculture. With technologies included in RBE mechanization and cheap ecologic production will even increase. 

But that's not the point. The point is the volunteering. Volunteering is fun. Why force people to have fun? It is about doing some solid work with interesting people (I was mostly with students, best and most intelligent guys and girls I've ever met) getting to know them, having fun and the hard and dirty work sort of gets done along the way. It is up to the organizers to create an interesting theme or program, that will attract the volunteers and keep them entertained.

EXC wrote:
 Then what gives the producers more incentive to produce? You take everything they produce, so they just stop. If you don't work, you just get free stuff. This is insane. A sure route to widespread famine.
What? You mean there is not already a widespread famine in the current system? What do you think are these 3 billions of people who live on less than 2 dollars per day???
What you say only makes sense in the system of scarcity. If there is scarcity, you have to work to get stuff, you've got to save your ass from the invisible cock of the market. (I think this will become my second favorite expression Smiling ) People will do anything for that, they will compete in economic arena, stand like braindead idiots, assembling cheap shit on conveyor belts. That is the power of money, it can force you to do a lousy job, but no amount of money will make you a master painter or inventor, if you already aren't one. If that is your talent, you will do it even for free, if you have a food and roof overhead. The point is, monetary incentive is not as awesome and necessary as you think. We will benefit the world best if we do what truly rewards us and leave the rest to the automatized robots.

We can think of the inflation as an imaginary pay to the machines, which work for free, better and faster than any human could. Let's imagine a corporation will buy the people a free lunch every day, in exchange for the right to employ robots instead of them. What's wrong about that? People's work is obsolete! Mine certainly is, you should see me walking absent-minded, long-haired, among the Korean cars on conveyor belt, thinking of social injustice Smiling

What gives the local producers the incentive to produce? Neighbours. Friends. Colleagues. Tradition. Grateful customers. The desire to be self-sufficient. Regular displays of best farmers' products. Pride and patriotism of local community. Lack of ambitions to do anything else. Or they just like that kind of job. Agriculture is a not unpopular area of study even on universities. And there is still hell a lot of room for improvement. Ever heard of permaculture, vertical hydroponic farms and automatic spiral field plow?

It is a miracle that farmers produce anything even today, with cheap abroad competition, hassle from the government and loans for mechanization on their heads. But trust me, they appreciate when people choose their products over some Chinese chemical shit, even if their stuff is more expensive. Local producers will keep the quality at the top, to please their neighbours and have a good relationship with them. They would never use a poisonous or otherwise bad substitute to dilute their milk and honey, unlike our Chinese comrades sometimes do.  
The point is, there's lots of other motivation to work than money and for the rest there is mechanization.

 

EXC wrote:
 don't like seeing the predatory loans either. But they are a symptom of poverty not a cause. They're vultures that eat the carcases but they didn't cause it.

What we need is a way to get people on the edge of poverty into job training programs. Provide them with some aid for a limited time. But they would need to agree to have their lives be managed by the job training companies. Kind of like entering the military, but where they are forced to be disiplined until they get out of poverty.

Yep, that is a very good idea. I'd love to see that done for whole gypsy (or white trash) families and communities. Something between a Jewish farming kibbutz, Hare Krishna farm and military camp. And not for a limited time, but as long until they learn the discipline and skills of daily life, from hygiene to sparing use of money. If they behave like naughty children, they should be treated like that and live in modern "tribes" with firm rules.

The point is, such camps might prove to be more comfortable or therapeutic to most of such people than life in the mainstream society. They might also become productive in terms of bio-quality farming products. But if exposed to commercialization, monetary profit at all costs, it would quickly turn into slavery. 

 

EXC wrote:
 I actually agree that is wrong to allow natural resources to be owned by anyone. Most conservatives are hypocrites because the present system allows people to get rich just by owning land, oil drilling rights, etc... It is destructive to the work ethic they so highly tout. When I argue with conservatives, they call be a communist, when I argue with leftists, they call me a right wing nut.

To me this group is just as bad as wall street. They all want a free lunch and special rights, and the subject of mandatory birth control is taboo. We're going to have economic problems and conflict until these are addressed.

Well, now you understand how I feel when talking with atheists and Christians Smiling But seriously, if that's what leftists are... Both right and left wings are caught in the contemporary system, which is totally inefficient, as I already described. Switching power from left to right wing and back every elections will not solve anything. The problems must be addressed by rational management of resources and the government itself. 
By the way, if you disagree with private ownership of natural resources, what about a free transparent international barter of excessive resources? Non-monetary basis, distribution according to the real needs. Relatively minimal needs, without the consumer culture. No more iPads and other devices newly produced every year and impossible to modify or innovate.

 

EXC wrote:
 Because someone has to work to make the lunch. If you don't compensate the people that do this, they stop. You just get more and more people looking for the free lunch and less people willing to make it.

Also the planet has limited land and water. So you'd need to limit population growth, even if you miraculously had enough workers willing to work for free.

In RBE people practically don't have to work to get food. Stuff like vertical mechanized hydroponic farms, etc. Plus solar-powered desalinization water production, etc. The technology is here, only market forces see no profit in it. Agriculture belongs to the primary sector, the less people work there, the more is the society advanced. In our modern society it's just a couple of %, maybe less.
Yes, we surely need a population growth control. The reproductive functions must be controlled. The problem is, you can't demand that from people, if you don't offer them something else first. Offer them education, career, entertainment and so on, and a completely different motivation kicks in. They will voluntarily delay childbearing to have more fun in life. This is called demographic revolution and it's the only thing that permanently decreases population and without violence. The trick is, it must be applied on whole Earth simultaneously, otherwise advanced countries get overrun by immigrants. All of Earth must fight for the justice of RBE and get treated with a fair share of resources, to live in dignity without the need to produce a dozen or two of child slaves.

I think the free food should go hand in hand with free contraception. I am reluctant to think of choices like mixing contraception into that free food, perhaps except of places like 20 million Mexico city slums, which might actually make everyone happy. Although a contraception chocolate bar sounds futuristic, the true solution is to keep people educated and informed. Contraception should be kept free as something that people use commonly, gladly and can't imagine their lives without it. 

 

EXC wrote:
 Still need a translation. How is deadly force to be used? 
In the interest of providing free food, housing, healthcare, education, security, energy, and creating jobs to fulfill these needs. Organizing national resources, offering them for international barter. As a think tank listening to people's opinions and suggestions (regularly gathered by computer queries) and carrying out their needs by openly developing creative solutions though the philosophy of RBE. 

I imagine such politicians like a group of creative thinkers and philosophers plus technical experts to consult their ideas and give them a practical form, plus the full Internet of interested public to provide a direct feedback. And I imagine myself among them Smiling

As for the deadly force, we are not civilized. We have the police, army, courts and much evidence to see that they won't prevent the criminality, only avenge it. RBE is truly civilized, there are no such things, neither there are social and biological reasons for criminality and violence. 
 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


TonyZXT
atheist
TonyZXT's picture
Posts: 174
Joined: 2007-09-30
User is offlineOffline
 Just saw this pic, and

 

Just saw this pic, and thought I'd add it in here in case people hadn't seen it yet.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Well if we are going to go

Well if we are going to go that route, I was out playing bar trivia and have not got an update on the pissed off tea party heavily armed people.  Still:

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Pacioli
atheist
Pacioli's picture
Posts: 64
Joined: 2011-09-17
User is offlineOffline
The picture is faked.

Sorry, but the following picture is a fake. Check for the picture on Google Earth. It has been rotated 180 and people added but apart from that you have the same cars turning the same corners, the same shadows and so on.

TonyZXT wrote:

 

Just saw this pic, and thought I'd add it in here in case people hadn't seen it yet.

Credit for bringing the fakery to my attention goes to user GenericBox on the Atheist Foundation of Australia forum.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Pacioli wrote:Sorry, but the

Pacioli wrote:

Sorry, but the following picture is a fake. Check for the picture on Google Earth. It has been rotated 180 and people added but apart from that you have the same cars turning the same corners, the same shadows and so on.

Credit for bringing the fakery to my attention goes to user GenericBox on the Atheist Foundation of Australia forum.

LOL, that's probably work of those folks who create fake UFO pictures and videos for unknown reasons. Do they want to help or damage the people's movement?

But there should be little doubt about media bias. For example, in my country media report on anti-gipsy protests, but they tell nothing of anti-government demonstrations and festivals in Prague. People were drumming in front of the castle and shouting "DEMISSION!" But what do we see in TV? The "inadaptables", as we are now allowed to call them politically correctly.

In my country, all non-state media are owned by Germans. Who owns your media?

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote: A government

Luminon wrote:

 A government is an institution meant to care for people.

No. Government is deadly force. At best it is a set of rules to prevent anarchy.

If you really believe and institution can acutally 'care' for people, start a charity.

Luminon wrote:

 You sometimes sound almost like an anti-Darwinian creationist propaganda Smiling 

In what way? You seem to believe that there is some moral standard that is not a human invention. Keep taxing the shit out of the rich while others have 12 kids and no means to support them is not cooperation.

How is making food, shelter and health care an unconditional birth right not right out of the theist playbook? Read the OT if you want to know where the concept of birth-rights came from. But this is what you and all the protesters are continually pushing. Birth-rights but no birth-responsibilities.

Luminon wrote:

Why take money only for services delivered?

I take it you've never run a business. Because if you let people take your money without delivering a service, they don't deliver.

 

Luminon wrote:

Don't blame the messenger, taxes are here, because if we just pay government to do something for us, then it's more practical and cheaper than if we'd do it ourselves.

Wrong. If you want something done right, do it yourself. Or at least don't pay anyone until they do it right. Where does all this faith that if you give someone your money, they are going to serve your interests with it? Is this how you deal with auto mechanics and home repair people? They must rip you off all the time.

Luminon wrote:

The problem is not in taxes, it's in government and how, why and for what are the money used. Firstly, most of the money go all the way long to the central or federal government. There are loses. They concentrate in huge pool of funds, called budget. There the loses are extremely huge, because everyone on the top take as much as they can get away with. Mostly on purposes that do not serve the taxpayers in any way or are misleading. Then the rest of money again trickles all the way down in form of public services, which may be badly and blindly applied, for example, indiscriminate use of welfare money. 

You keep saying local control is best. What is more local than yourself? You pay for the services you need and want. What is more local than that? The federal governments role only be national security and management of natural resources.

 

Luminon wrote:

Taxes should be progressive.

So then the people that pay more into the system leave and people move in that take more than they put back into the system. You don't get that not having pay as you go is unsustainable in a global economy. Business leaves high tax states for lower tax states and countries every day.

 

Luminon wrote:

 Also, if we take taxes progressively and keep them locally, there will be enough money for such enterprises.

Businesses and the rich are just going to leave or close up shop if you raise their taxes. The rich got to be rich by not giving their money away for nothing in return, why would they ever start?

 

Luminon wrote:

But that's not the point. The point is the volunteering. Volunteering is fun.

We don't have time for 'fun'. Remember all the hungry mouths in the world to feed. We all need to be in stressed out jobs to pay for other people's large families that they (and their god) can't support themselves.

 

Luminon wrote:

What? You mean there is not already a widespread famine in the current system?

Any system without mandatory population control is going to have widespread famine. That's how we do population control.

 

Luminon wrote:

 Yep, that is a very good idea. I'd love to see that done for whole gypsy (or white trash) families and communities. Something between a Jewish farming kibbutz, Hare Krishna farm and military camp. And not for a limited time, but as long until they learn the discipline and skills of daily life, from hygiene to sparing use of money. If they behave like naughty children, they should be treated like that and live in modern "tribes" with firm rules.

How about training them for jobs industry needs like nursing, IT professional, call centers, etc... Not letting them have more children until they get a job. And most importantly only paying the schools when they get the unemployed into a job.

Luminon wrote:

By the way, if you disagree with private ownership of natural resources, what about a free transparent international barter of excessive resources? Non-monetary basis, distribution according to the real needs. Relatively minimal needs, without the consumer culture. No more iPads and other devices newly produced every year and impossible to modify or innovate.

I don't see why it is any of your business. The majority of value that goes into making iPads is someone's work. If I trade my labor to buy an IPad, how does that negatively affect you or anyone else?

If I buy a piece of farm land and put up a no trespassing sign, then this is resource no longer available for your survival. Since you can't use this land to grow your food, I should be pay for the privilege and make sure you have a job skill so you can survive and buy the food I produce.

If I sit in my office and write software, I should pay for the right to pollute the air for the electricity I use, but why any more? If you tax what I'm doing, I stop or find another place to do it.

You want this high technology to grow food, but then you want to tax the shit out of people and companies that produce technology and give it to those that don't produce any technology. So over time, what should we expect?

 

Luminon wrote:

In RBE people practically don't have to work to get food. Stuff like vertical mechanized hydroponic farms, etc. Plus solar-powered desalinization water production, etc. The technology is here, only market forces see no profit in it. Agriculture belongs to the primary sector, the less people work there, the more is the society advanced. In our modern society it's just a couple of %, maybe less.

You have to have skilled workers to create this. But these protesters don't seem to be interested in learning this technology, they just want to bitch and bang drums. Where's their fucking signs that say train me to program computers? Instead of demanding universal health-care why don't they demand to be trained as nurses? No, it all just want a free lunch. They all want something for nothing, same as people they hate so much.


 

Luminon wrote:

As for the deadly force, we are not civilized. We have the police, army, courts and much evidence to see that they won't prevent the criminality, only avenge it. RBE is truly civilized, there are no such things, neither there are social and biological reasons for criminality and violence. 
 

There is no science behind RBE. The hippies all tried this shit already and failed miserably.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:In my country,

Luminon wrote:

In my country, all non-state media are owned by Germans. Who owns your media?

 

 

Well, there are big national corporations but they have been pushed down by an Aussie who lies through his teeth and a Brit who hacks his own royal families cell phones.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:You have to have

Quote:
You have to have skilled workers to create this. But these protesters don't seem to be interested in learning this technology, they just want to bitch and bang drums. Where's their fucking signs that say train me to program computers? Instead of demanding universal health-care why don't they demand to be trained as nurses? No, it all just want a free lunch. They all want something for nothing, same as people they hate so much.

Free lunch? Don't talk to me about free lunch when GE not only paid no taxes but cut jobs. Don't talk to me about "free lunch" when NJ tax payers are STILL paying for an NFL stadium that has been turned into a parking lot.

You complain about the protesters wanting a free lunch? I doubt you'd find many at that protest who don't have jobs or don't want jobs.

And lets say all of them train to be nurses? Doesn't that hospital still need janitors? Why would a hospital need to be clean? That would be silly.  Most hospitals also have cafeterias. If everyone is a nurse, who would serve the nurses food?

Technology requires factories, so even if you train someone to invent the computer, you still need lower paid people to pack and ship the goods, and you also need someone to clean the factory.

YOU are of the stupid mentality that low paying means worthless or lazy. If ANYONE has an honest job, it is a worthy job. Looking down on people is what you are doing.

And those "lazy" people are supported by unions, teachers unions, cop unions. I don't think teachers or cops are lazy.  And I do not think most of those protesters are lazy either. But I am sure you went down there and talked to them yourself didn't you.?

If anyone is getting a socialized "free lunch" it has been the top two percent at the expense of the rest of us.

It does not take one class to make our three class system to work, it takes ALL OF US. As soon as you devalue the middle and poor, you will eventually screw yourself.

And as far as health care, if someone doesn't have to chose between paying their mortgage or rent or paying for their medical bills, GUESS WHAT, they have more money to spend on the products business sells.

YOUR view of economies is simplistic and cliche. Life is not simply about choices, lots of aspects in life can and do affect you even if you didn't make a bad decision.

You can chose to take a drive and someone can run a red light and t-bone you. Now while you didn't break the law, another person's actions affected you.

 

 

 


 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:If you tax what I'm

Quote:
If you tax what I'm doing, I stop or find another place to do it.

What a selfish mentality. You don't mind making money off the labor of others, but you don't want to do a damned thing to help your workers, other than to say "buck it up".

Warren Buffet who probably makes you look homeless by comparison would call you a crybaby.

Yea, you can do that. You have the legal right to do that. But that says more about you and nothing about your workers who DO WORK HARD and would be pissed if you did that.

It is funny how people with this mentality want loyalty to their company but don't do a damn thing themselves to be loyal to their workers or the communities they live in.

If I made 200k a year and half of that was taken away in taxes, there STILL would not be one county in the United States where I could not live comfortably. If I made 1 million and only ended up with 500k there still would not be any county here where I could not find a decent place to live. Millionaires and billionaires have no fucking excuse and as far as I am concerned they are the welfare queens and the crybabies.

LET THEM EAT CAKE!

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:What a selfish

Brian37 wrote:

What a selfish mentality. You don't mind making money off the labor of others, but you don't want to do a damned thing to help your workers, other than to say "buck it up".

How does one "make money off the labor of others"? Last time I check, slavery was illegal. So if you take a bus to work, and the driver only makes minimum wage, then you are making money "off the labor of others".

Why should I work to take care of people that offer me nothing in return? Do you work a second job just to take care of starving babies in Africa? No. So then you're just selfish too. Is this your definition of unselfishness, I work my ass off to support these bozos that just want to bang drums all day instead of learning a job skill? Loyalty and community are 2 way streets.

And the job market doesn't need more unskilled janitors that make $10/hr. and pay no taxes but demand massive services. It doesn't matter how noble you think the profession is, it's just numbers don't add up. That's why we have a massive debt.

How are you and all the protesters not 100% selfish? Since you're an expert on what is selfish and unselfish, why aren't all these people that decided to get a degree in fine arts instead of nursing to address our health care crisis selfish as well? If these protesteters are so unselfish, why aren't they volunteering at a hospital instead of being a bum at these protests?

 

 

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Oh my god, who the fuck said

Oh my god, who the fuck said anything about that making money off labor should be illegal?

I called you selfish because you would make them suffer before you would sacrifice something yourself There are many business owners, mostly mom and pop shops, that do put their employees first. But there are not enough big businesses that do this. People should not be treated like a number on a page.

What is more important? Eating, or your 9 holes of golf? If the economy were great no one would give a fuck, but I find it sick that you would blackmail society instead of playing one less round or own one less car or live in one house.

There is nothing wrong with owning a business, BY ITSELF. It is not what you want, it is HOW you want to get it and what you would do to others to get it.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Why should I work to

Quote:
Why should I work to take care of people that offer me nothing in return?

LET THEM EAT CAKE.

Don't ever step into the food joint I work at. Your food would taste funny.

Get this through your skull, ANYONE, AND I MEAN ANYONE, whether  they work for you or work on the other side of the country, and they have an honest job, THEY ARE OFFERING SOCIETY something.

If there is no job too small, then get the fuck over yourself and stop putting others down because they don't have what you have.

Treat people like shit and you will get the same in return.

AGAIN, it is not what you want in life, it is your attitude and your attitude sucks.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Zeepheus
atheist
Zeepheus's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2011-08-26
User is offlineOffline
I hope that these people

I hope that these people that are protesting are all registered voters if so then we can possibly right the mistake that was made during the midterms and remove all the extreme right wingers (read tea party) from office. It is time we cleaned up the Tax code and closed ALL of the corporate loopholes that keep companies like GE from paying anywhere near their share of the taxes. I am not saying we need to raise taxes I am saying we need to close the loopholes and make all income (capitol gains) equally taxable. I also think on the reverse side we need to do away with the earned income credit. I'm sorry but NO ONE should get more back that they paid in taxes especially if that amount paid was none. Regardless of what deductions an individual is eligible for there should be a minimum percentage of their income they have to pay in taxes. Fair taxes work both ways. The problem is extreme liberals will never want to take away a handout like the EIC and tea party members will never close the loop holes for business because they will call it raising taxes. This is all a very complicated matter and no one seems to really want to sit down and work out a solution that truly shares the burden amongst everyone. Personally I don't mind paying my share of the taxes I just think everyone should pay their fair share.

I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.

You see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Oh my god, who

Brian37 wrote:

Oh my god, who the fuck said anything about that making money off labor should be illegal?

I didn't say that. I just want you to define what is "making money of someone else's labor".

Brian37 wrote:

I called you selfish because you would make them suffer before you would sacrifice something yourself There are many business owners, mostly mom and pop shops, that do put their employees first.

How do I "make people suffer"? And if mom and pop "put their employees first", they pass the cost on, which makes the cost of everything higher. That's why the poor shop at Walmart and not mom and pop. If you don't want a world with Walmarts, it's mandatory birth control and an education system the puts people in jobs that pay. There is no other way.

Brian37 wrote:

But there are not enough big businesses that do this. People should not be treated like a number on a page.

When you have overpopulation, people are treated as numbers. The system is overwhelmed with too many people, how else can people be treated? So why aren't they demanding mandatory birth control and less immigration?

Brian37 wrote:

What is more important? Eating, or your 9 holes of golf? If the economy were great no one would give a fuck, but I find it sick that you would blackmail society instead of playing one less round or own one less car or live in one house.

Why are any of these activities so evil? The grounds keeper at the golf course needs to feed his family. So does the auto-worker and construction worker.

It seems to me the most anti-social activity is just protesting how unfair life is and not doing anything while demanding free stuff from everyone else. How is banging drums all day demanding free health-care instead of studying medical care not selfish by your standards? Isn't this just a big pity party for a lazy whiners?

Here is theme song for these people:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ3w-AoiPos

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Zeepheus wrote:It is time we

Zeepheus wrote:

It is time we cleaned up the Tax code and closed ALL of the corporate loopholes that keep companies like GE from paying anywhere near their share of the taxes.

Isn't a big reason why GE paid no taxes because all leftists want green energy investment? So GE takes advantage of all the tax breaks pushed by the left and now they are demonized by the leftists.

http://biggovernment.com/dfreeman/2011/03/26/green-energy-helps-bring-ge-taxes-to-zero/

It's the same shit as the bank demonization. The left demonized banks for not lending enough to poor and had the government to make it a policy to lend to the poor. Now the banks are evil and greedy for going bankrupt for making so many loans to people that couldn't repay.

So I don't know here you come off blaming the tea party, when they are against all this special subsidies for green energy. The left was pushing for loans to Solyndra, not the tea party.

 

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Zeepheus
atheist
Zeepheus's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2011-08-26
User is offlineOffline
So what your saying is the

So what your saying is the huge holes in the tax code that allow companies like GE, Pepsico, Coke, and many other large multinationals to shelter billions in tax havens and pay no taxes on them do not effect the total taxes these companies pay? Are you for the corporate tax holiday that would allow these companies to bring this money back to the US and pay almost no taxes on it? I will agree that subsidies played a part but were not the only or even the biggest reason that a company like GE paid no taxes. I was a small business owner for years and I know how much I paid and it was most of what I made. My point is not that the left is good and the right is bad (yes I do have my reasons for wanting the tea party out and taxes is only a small part of it) my point is taxes need to be fair. When I owned my company I barely made enough to live and fortunately my wife worked and could help out or I would have had to go out of business for reasons not of my own choosing. I did not blame the tea party of GE not paying taxes I said they were not willing to close loop holes in the tax code. I also said that I did not agree with many of the give aways the left supports like the EIC, free cell phones, excessive SSI disability and welfare, etc. I think people do need to get off their butts and work but I also think there need to be more equity in pay and that companies are more than capable of paying it and creating the needed jobs. It is completely ridiculous that the CEO of the company my wife works for makes almost 500 times what she makes in a year. Tell me in any world how a disparity like that is in any way fair. It is issues like that that spark this protest the disparity between the top 25 people in a company and the 20,000 people that work for the company. I am not a big fan of handouts to companies or to individuals What I am talking about is fair pay. There is no reason a CEO of any company should make more than 20 times what their average worker makes. Show me a fortune 500 company where this is the case. You can't they average nearly 300 times what their average employee makes.

I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.

You see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:No. Government is

EXC wrote:

No. Government is deadly force. At best it is a set of rules to prevent anarchy.

If you really believe and institution can acutally 'care' for people, start a charity.

If government is a deadly force, then why are most government-havers alive? Of course it is a set of rules, just like a computer program is a set of rules. Are computer programs deadly forces? 

No, government must take care of people by default, charity is a makeshift attempt to patch up huge holes in the system. But do WE need charity? Is sewerage charity? Is streetlight charity? Is municipal police charity? Is free public school system charity? Do you buy the asphalt under your feet? Some things are just too large to buy for an individual and too common to bother ourselves about. That's what government is for, a machine to take care of daily mundane details that make our lives better. Don't try to pick mistakes where are none, don't try to fix parts of the machine that work well, fix only what is broken. This is why you're an IT guy and I study public administration. Thank you for the opportunity to exercise my thoughts and express them better. It will really help next time I'd have to convince someone else.

EXC wrote:
 In what way? You seem to believe that there is some moral standard that is not a human invention. Keep taxing the shit out of the rich while others have 12 kids and no means to support them is not cooperation.

How is making food, shelter and health care an unconditional birth right not right out of the theist playbook? Read the OT if you want to know where the concept of birth-rights came from. But this is what you and all the protesters are continually pushing. Birth-rights but no birth-responsibilities.

On the contrary, you seem to believe that there is some moral standard that is not our invention, and it is our primitive animalistic and genetic urges. Yes, these urges are real, but they become weak and latent when people are taken care of properly. Abraham Maslow says so and modern society agrees, takes a contraception pill and forgets 3 million years of our evolution.

I consider money just an imaginary vector of economy, I do not think it should (exist, or at least) be privately owned by the rich in large amounts. I like to think of money as of water and electricity, omnipresent, vital and free in small amounts, not as gold and cocaine, luxurious, adored and addictive.

As for the mentioned unconditional birth rights, this idea is very non-theistic. Religious people are very exclusive and snobbish, they certainly wouldn't wish them for everyone. This is instead an act of inventing new morality. But this is no hippie talk, this is actually a clever trick to fool the primitive human brain. This is the proper treatment that human brain needs to put the primitive urges to sleep. 

But nowhere I said anything of birth-responsibilities. Don't presume I haven't thought of these, I have an electrotechnic automatization high school education and much of that is highly similar to workings of state and economy. The utilitarian resemblance, positive and negative feedbacks for proper regulation, and so on.
Duties are the negative feedback for the society, except that this is a sensitive and risky topic. People like to hear about the birth-rights, but talk about birth-responsibilities and they accuse you of communism, fascism and other regimes that forced people to public participation, marches with banners, decorating their windows and so on. So this can not work by force. This must come about by educating children for active citizenship and organizing adults into volunteering through fun and positive motivation. This needs subtlety and overall cultural influence.
I would welcome things like an open caste system of society, in which you can move up and down and gain or lose rights according to your needs and abilities. But talking about this publically is really premature. With wrong materialistic priorities of today such a system would be a nightmare.

EXC wrote:
 I take it you've never run a business. Because if you let people take your money without delivering a service, they don't deliver.

Wrong. If you want something done right, do it yourself. Or at least don't pay anyone until they do it right. Where does all this faith that if you give someone your money, they are going to serve your interests with it? Is this how you deal with auto mechanics and home repair people? They must rip you off all the time.

 Yes, that's the corrupting influence of scarcity and monetary system. If people are willing to mess up the logistics for money, then perhaps we'd be better off without money. Or at least without the fear of not having money and irrational desire to have more money than we can possibly use. With scarcity out of society, honesty and fairness becomes natural.
I love honesty and fairness, because it makes things go smoothly. Others will appreciate it too, given chance when scarcity is gone.

EXC wrote:
 You keep saying local control is best. What is more local than yourself? You pay for the services you need and want. What is more local than that? The federal governments role only be national security and management of natural resources.
I don't exactly think local is the best, but that local and global are equally important. 
Yes, individual self-control is the ideal, but there are things you do NOT WANT to have control over, because they are FUCKING ANNOYING. This is why people create a "machine" or an organization that will do them for you. You don't want to build your own roads or manually switch on and off all streetlights in neighbourhood, or personally guard your own house instead going on holidays. This is what you'd have to do in anarchy. But clever people invented a machine called government that will do these annoying chores. Your job is only to tell it what you want, give it some little money and kick the living shit out of it, if it ever starts thinking that it exists for anything else than serving your basic needs.

The modern idea is, that it is fucking annoying to work all day long in monetary system, run in the monetary treadmill and trying to outrun the invisible dick of the market behind you. Today we have the technology to put this to history and create a government that will take care also of the mentioned basic needs like food, housing, education, healthcare and so on. 

EXC wrote:
 So then the people that pay more into the system leave and people move in that take more than they put back into the system. You don't get that not having pay as you go is unsustainable in a global economy. Business leaves high tax states for lower tax states and countries every day.

Businesses and the rich are just going to leave or close up shop if you raise their taxes. The rich got to be rich by not giving their money away for nothing in return, why would they ever start?

People leave, because there are tax paradises that are allowed to compete with our "people's paradises". Our system is globally fucked up (we call it globalization) and this is why the solution must be global too. We need a non-competitive system, the problem is, that such a system is incapable of competition, it needs to stiffle the competition first. When it comes to making a living, competition is a nonsense anyway.

You can't set progressive taxes and locally beneficial economy without doing so in the whole world, or at least closing your borders. Or in case of some European countries, where everyone buys ONLY from local national offers, NEVER from foreigners, no matter of the costs and savings. This is an absolute antithesis to the so-called free market competition, yet it works wonderfully and I'd like to see this officially in the whole world. No more cheap shit from China, back to the good old "commie" boots and electronics that last 20 years at least, they were made to last, not to end up on dump yard in two years. Planned obsolence is absurd.

EXC wrote:
 We don't have time for 'fun'. Remember all the hungry mouths in the world to feed. We all need to be in stressed out jobs to pay for other people's large families that they (and their god) can't support themselves.
Firstly, volunteering in various humanitary processes can be with some guidance and proper funding classified as 'fun'. Peace Corps, for example, though they had lots of problems with politics and bureaucracy.

Secondly, large families of people cost us relatively little, because our budgets ignore them. 3 billions of people live on less than 2 dollars a day, how is that expensive??? The top global expenses are not social by far, we spend today more on weapons than during cold war arms race. Add to that entertainment industry, consumer product industry, big pharma, and specially all this financial industry, which is totally useless and yet holds more money than anything else. We have time and money for all that, yet nothing for the people. Just remember when bankers fucked up last time, who received all these hundreds of billions? The hungry people? Nope, Wall Street. This is what keeps us in a global stone age.
So the cost of feeding all the hungry mouths is ridiculously small, compared to all that we waste every year. Someone has his priorities fucking wrong.

 

EXC wrote:
 Any system without mandatory population control is going to have widespread famine. That's how we do population control.
No, we don't. Any system without demographic revolution will be overpopulated, because this is people's primitive reaction on harsh conditions. War, poverty and lack of education make people multiply like bacteria. First eliminate war, poverty and illiteracy, only then the obvious rational methods of contraception can have any effect. Every demographic revolution has a temporary increase of population, but if you do it right, the increase is minimal. And then it steadily declines. And all this while having the country all nice and safe place to live or travel in.

 

EXC wrote:
 How about training them for jobs industry needs like nursing, IT professional, call centers, etc... Not letting them have more children until they get a job. And most importantly only paying the schools when they get the unemployed into a job.
The problem with gypsies is, they're statistically not very intellectual, but there is a noticeable talent for music and dance. I think they would be happiest in the primary and secondary sector, like agriculture, fishing, building, woodwork, etc. Of course, it is necessary to try to raise their skills, not hold them in place. Anyone who has the interest should try to develop it. There are some highly educated gipsy individuals, although they had to abandon the tribal families, they would not fit in there. I only say that the tightly knit together tribes in ghettos today should start at the bottom with simpliest work, that would be boring for us intellectuals. 

 

EXC wrote:
 I don't see why it is any of your business. The majority of value that goes into making iPads is someone's work. If I trade my labor to buy an IPad, how does that negatively affect you or anyone else?
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSMSFLAsNzc No, you don't trade your labor. Your country's superior buying power (and ownership of superior financial institutions, military force and so on) allows it to enslave and ransom the rest of the world to do the work for almost nothing and carry most of the expenses by itself. The dollar price tag on such a thing is just a speculative fiction, it has nothing to do with the price of resources, labour, impact on ecology and humanitarian conditions. This is the free market system, everyone's free to get bullied at nearest opportunity.

 

EXC wrote:
 If I buy a piece of farm land and put up a no trespassing sign, then this is resource no longer available for your survival. Since you can't use this land to grow your food, I should be pay for the privilege and make sure you have a job skill so you can survive and buy the food I produce.

If I sit in my office and write software, I should pay for the right to pollute the air for the electricity I use, but why any more? If you tax what I'm doing, I stop or find another place to do it.

You want this high technology to grow food, but then you want to tax the shit out of people and companies that produce technology and give it to those that don't produce any technology. So over time, what should we expect?

No, this is what I would have to do in monetary system and with no political will worthy of that name. This is why we need RBE, in RBE you don't have to put a fence around land for your survival, food (and everything else according to demand and resources) is produced and given to you in necessary amount as a basic right. You don't have to pay for electricity and pollution, because electricity is produced sustainably and ecologically. And you don't have to tax anyone, because there is no money. Just like USA didn't pay for the hundreds of thousands of airplanes instantaneously produced when WW2 broke out and they really needed these airplanes. Your objections are all valid and stuff, but we need to overthrow the system and estabilish RBE to make them irrelevant, anything else is just beating a dead horse.

If you have any actual objections to RBE, I'd like to hear them.

EXC wrote:
 You have to have skilled workers to create this. But these protesters don't seem to be interested in learning this technology, they just want to bitch and bang drums. Where's their fucking signs that say train me to program computers? Instead of demanding universal health-care why don't they demand to be trained as nurses? No, it all just want a free lunch. They all want something for nothing, same as people they hate so much.
Everything must go through the proper channels. Protesters protest, that's their job. Their job is to kick the government or if necessary, bring it down. They must keep bitching until it starts spending money on training and creating job opportunities for people like you. This is called division or specialization of labour and was very highly appreciated by anyone who ever needed a job done. Working on large projects is a collective, organized effort, whether you like it or not. And our current problems are global and need a deep global overhaul, not just retraining a few thousands people. If you can't understand that, I'm happy to tell you about it, which I do right now. 

EXC wrote:
 There is no science behind RBE. The hippies all tried this shit already and failed miserably. 
No science? There is Jacque Fresco's solid engineering plus behavioral research like Abraham Maslow's and genetically-cultural phenomena like Dutch potato famine and many others things, explained on the website and in the two latter Zeitgeist movies. But most notably, there is the basic common sense, logic, efficiency and global overview that hippies never understood. Hippies dropped out of college, RBE promoters enroll on colleges.

On the contrary, there is no science in economy as it is today. I've been taught the economy and it's all just an ideal fictitious model. The reality is absolutely different and goes against all logic. Even the good old supply and demand does not apply anymore.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Zeepheus wrote:So what your

Zeepheus wrote:

So what your saying is the huge holes in the tax code that allow companies like GE, Pepsico, Coke, and many other large multinationals to shelter billions in tax havens and pay no taxes on them do not effect the total taxes these companies pay? Are you for the corporate tax holiday that would allow these companies to bring this money back to the US and pay almost no taxes on it? I will agree that subsidies played a part but were not the only or even the biggest reason that a company like GE paid no taxes. I was a small business owner for years and I know how much I paid and it was most of what I made. My point is not that the left is good and the right is bad (yes I do have my reasons for wanting the tea party out and taxes is only a small part of it) my point is taxes need to be fair. When I owned my company I barely made enough to live and fortunately my wife worked and could help out or I would have had to go out of business for reasons not of my own choosing. I did not blame the tea party of GE not paying taxes I said they were not willing to close loop holes in the tax code. I also said that I did not agree with many of the give aways the left supports like the EIC, free cell phones, excessive SSI disability and welfare, etc. I think people do need to get off their butts and work but I also think there need to be more equity in pay and that companies are more than capable of paying it and creating the needed jobs. It is completely ridiculous that the CEO of the company my wife works for makes almost 500 times what she makes in a year. Tell me in any world how a disparity like that is in any way fair. It is issues like that that spark this protest the disparity between the top 25 people in a company and the 20,000 people that work for the company. I am not a big fan of handouts to companies or to individuals What I am talking about is fair pay. There is no reason a CEO of any company should make more than 20 times what their average worker makes. Show me a fortune 500 company where this is the case. You can't they average nearly 300 times what their average employee makes.

THANK YOU!

The right wants to make this about wealth and the left hates wealth and hates the rich.

NO we merely simply don't want to be starved out of existence. The ratio is out of whack, and this has nothing to do with hating wealth.

You look at other countries where the pay gap is not anywhere near as lopsided, where the people don't have to chose between mortgage and doctor bills, while every country has its ups and downs, ours are far more pronounced precisely because of the rethuglicans "let them eat cake" economic policies.

They want to take us back to the very days that caused the great depression, but they are too stupid to realize that is where we are headed.

Now, I do have to warn, savvy spin doctors on their side will use the same old "throw them a bone" tactic when the waters ripple enough to lull us back into the complacency of the past 30 years.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote: No, we

Luminon wrote:

 No, we don't. Any system without demographic revolution will be overpopulated, because this is people's primitive reaction on harsh conditions. War, poverty and lack of education make people multiply like bacteria. First eliminate war, poverty and illiteracy, only then the obvious rational methods of contraception can have any effect. Every demographic revolution has a temporary increase of population, but if you do it right, the increase is minimal. And then it steadily declines. And all this while having the country all nice and safe place to live or travel in.

Then why has the current recession caused birth rates to drop?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/08/27/business/main6811139.shtml

The same thing also happened in the Great Depression.

Even if this theory is correct, the solution is still mandatory birth conrol for a least one genertion. If government is no longer swamped with too many poor unemployed people, then you never get to the point of removing the harsh conditions to see if your theory is correct. Once population preasures are no longer present, then madatory birth control could be eased.

If there is good science behind this RBE, why don't the true believers go off and start a commune and show us all it working on a small scale? If is utopia, people would then be willing to adopt it globally right?  At least the hippies in the 60s tried to start some communes based on their beliefs and then these later folded as predicted.

What should happen is different theories of social order should be experimented with to see if your theories are correct or are mine.

 

 

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


ZuS
atheist
ZuS's picture
Posts: 562
Joined: 2009-02-22
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Isn't a big reason

EXC wrote:

Isn't a big reason why GE paid no taxes because all leftists want green energy investment? So GE takes advantage of all the tax breaks pushed by the left and now they are demonized by the leftists.

In the immortal words of Hank Williams Jr: "come on, come on..."

Look, all you need to realize is that giant corps have become governmental institutions and then come down to occupy the fascist government at wall st. with us Smiling

EXC wrote:

It's the same shit as the bank demonization. The left demonized banks for not lending enough to poor and had the government to make it a policy to lend to the poor. Now the banks are evil and greedy for going bankrupt for making so many loans to people that couldn't repay.

Yea, poor bankers. I am sure they had nothing to do with it. It was the lefties that got rid of the Glass-Steagal in 1999, bankers just sortof went off on a gabling spree because they were forced. Poor bankers, they got totally hoodwinked into deregulation, privatizing profits and socializing losses, earning record profits while the rest of the country starves and generally fucking us over on every turn. They don't want to do that, they are being forced! They would much rather be fair players in a competitive market and breed fluffy bunnies to put smiles on children's faces. We should really be more fair to the bankers, after all, they haven't quite fucked us to death yet. You schmuck.

EXC wrote:

So I don't know here you come off blaming the tea party, when they are against all this special subsidies for green energy. The left was pushing for loans to Solyndra, not the tea party.

Yea, it's the green policies. I agree completely. The green policies of decade long wars in middle east, the hippie corporate ponzi schemes destroying pension funds and starving social programmes, the environmental Citizens United rulling making unlimited corruption legal and the organic drone strikes on civilians earning billions to corporate war machine... Those fucking green policies...

I am not saying that we shouldn't look long and hard at our green policies, I am just saying that corporate war criminals run the society and that maybe we should unfuck that situation first. What do you say?

Logic is a systematic method of coming to the wrong conclusion with confidence.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
ZuS wrote:EXC wrote:Isn't a

ZuS wrote:

EXC wrote:

Isn't a big reason why GE paid no taxes because all leftists want green energy investment? So GE takes advantage of all the tax breaks pushed by the left and now they are demonized by the leftists.

In the immortal words of Hank Williams Jr: "come on, come on..."

Look, all you need to realize is that giant corps have become governmental institutions and then come down to occupy the fascist government at wall st. with us Smiling

EXC wrote:

It's the same shit as the bank demonization. The left demonized banks for not lending enough to poor and had the government to make it a policy to lend to the poor. Now the banks are evil and greedy for going bankrupt for making so many loans to people that couldn't repay.

Yea, poor bankers. I am sure they had nothing to do with it. It was the lefties that got rid of the Glass-Steagal in 1999, bankers just sortof went off on a gabling spree because they were forced. Poor bankers, they got totally hoodwinked into deregulation, privatizing profits and socializing losses, earning record profits while the rest of the country starves and generally fucking us over on every turn. They don't want to do that, they are being forced! They would much rather be fair players in a competitive market and breed fluffy bunnies to put smiles on children's faces. We should really be more fair to the bankers, after all, they haven't quite fucked us to death yet. You schmuck.

EXC wrote:

So I don't know here you come off blaming the tea party, when they are against all this special subsidies for green energy. The left was pushing for loans to Solyndra, not the tea party.

Yea, it's the green policies. I agree completely. The green policies of decade long wars in middle east, the hippie corporate ponzi schemes destroying pension funds and starving social programmes, the environmental Citizens United rulling making unlimited corruption legal and the organic drone strikes on civilians earning billions to corporate war machine... Those fucking green policies...

I am not saying that we shouldn't look long and hard at our green policies, I am just saying that corporate war criminals run the society and that maybe we should unfuck that situation first. What do you say?

Lets not confuse business with monopolies which is what you rightfully condemn "corporate war criminals" of.

It is not a matter of all business bad and all those who want to make money bad. It is the simple climate of thought that "It worked for me" so it must be good for all.

A monopoly is a monopoly is a monopoly, be it religious or political or business.

Business by itself is not bad. Humans need to sell stuff to put food on the table. What you seem to miss which Beyond Saving seems to miss is that the desires are not the problem, it is the insistence that what works for you is good for all.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ZuS
atheist
ZuS's picture
Posts: 562
Joined: 2009-02-22
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Lets not

Brian37 wrote:

Lets not confuse business with monopolies which is what you rightfully condemn "corporate war criminals" of.

Can we stop calling these guys businessmen, please? I mean they indirectly write the legislation, profit from it, declare wars and direct domestic policy, all through corruption - I think that qualifies the major corps for non-transparent legislative agency status. They are basically shadow government.

Brian37 wrote:

It is not a matter of all business bad and all those who want to make money bad. It is the simple climate of thought that "It worked for me" so it must be good for all.

A monopoly is a monopoly is a monopoly, be it religious or political or business.

These guys are nowhere near businessmen, unless you consider Sicillian mobsters for businessmen as well. A monopoly is far too benign a term for what these guys are doing. A monopoly is a theoretical construct that sort of follows it's own interest, but is essentially passive and subject to the market rules. These guys aren't like that, they do not just profit from the situation as market agents do - they manifacture the situation as political agents do. If the situation they like is war, they will buy one. Or fifty.

Brian37 wrote:

Business by itself is not bad. Humans need to sell stuff to put food on the table. What you seem to miss which Beyond Saving seems to miss is that the desires are not the problem, it is the insistence that what works for you is good for all.

Yea, I know. My local grocer didn't lobby for the last giant order of killer drones. You really don't need to tell me that; I own a small business myself.

Logic is a systematic method of coming to the wrong conclusion with confidence.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote: Then why has the

EXC wrote:

Then why has the current recession caused birth rates to drop?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/08/27/business/main6811139.shtml

The same thing also happened in the Great Depression.

Because U. S. already underwent demographic revolution, FFS! USA is not Nigeria or Somalia. It is a developed, industrialized country with educated population. Industrialized means that people usually don't make living by agriculture, so more babies won't help them work in the crop fields. This is why people react by having less children instead of more.
American problem is not as much overpopulation, but extremely high consumption and waste of global resources. 

EXC wrote:
 Even if this theory is correct, the solution is still mandatory birth conrol for a least one genertion. If government is no longer swamped with too many poor unemployed people, then you never get to the point of removing the harsh conditions to see if your theory is correct. Once population preasures are no longer present, then madatory birth control could be eased.
Yes, birth control is a necessity. But you can't order it as mandatory and enforce it ruthlessly, because this would be oppression and people would eventually rebel against it, destroying everything, good and bad aspects of the plan. Also, you can't come to poor, uneducated people and demand one more thing from them, not to have children to take care of them when they're old. They would give you a finger. 
I wouldn't advise a total contraception, something tells me that rapid drop in birth rates would create lots of demographic problems, like a majority of elderly people and not enough of young ones to take care of things. But it's an experts' job to tell. I'd prefer a regular, orderly decrease of population over a longer period. But it must be done through positive motivation, advanced psychology and social engineering, so people have less children willingly. Every violation of free will has bad consequences.
 

EXC wrote:
 If there is good science behind this RBE, why don't the true believers go off and start a commune and show us all it working on a small scale? If is utopia, people would then be willing to adopt it globally right?  At least the hippies in the 60s tried to start some communes based on their beliefs and then these later folded as predicted.

What should happen is different theories of social order should be experimented with to see if your theories are correct or are mine.

There is no such thing as a RBE commune, (besides the Venus town in Florida, new facilities in Ecuador etc) because RBE is based on cybernation, not human labour or decision-making. If you want to see RBE in practice, visit a Japanese factory where they have Just-in-time logistics, which eliminates the need for storage facilities. Look at their automatic assembly lines. Try out these new cars that automatically park for you. Have a ride in the new London Heathrow airport automatic buses. It is not about idelogy, but about applying science and technology. There is no necessary belief, science and technology already proved themselves trustworthy. RBE is designed to eliminate even more unnecessary hassle from our lives and give us more freedom in material security. The rest is up to us.

Living with so much more free time must be obviously very different from how we live now. It will require some adaptation, specially educating people on how to spend free time productively, doing their true hobbies. But don't try to tell me that free time is a bad thing and that it is better to spend it in boredom and misery of resource-wasting work as we do today. We are capable of cybernating the industry and we are also capable of inventing productive activities for free time. (where do you think the university of the 3rd age came from?) This is where we can and should experiment, while technology provides everyone free food. Jacque Fresco designed the technologic aspect, the social aspect is up to each one of us.

What sort of social order do you imagine, in society where technology eliminates the need to hoard money and property and compete with other people in the process? I can only know for sure that people will differ according to their qualification (education, expertise, etc), independence, initiative, creativity, social skills and past achievements. Which is pretty much informal. Maybe you imagine something more formalized than college degrees? Social engineering is for some as exciting as technical inventions. But whatever kind of social order there will be, RBE will make it much more comfortable to live in.

You can have a look at some explanatory  videos, you'll see this is no utopia, but a rational application of technology. 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 I agree with what you're

 I agree with what you're saying about progressive taxation but progressivity isn't redistribution. Like you said it matters what tax money is spent on. Those protesters should probably be more concerned about that because the US already has a progressive tax system. If too much money goes to military spending and not enough for social programs then taxing progressively won't really reduce inequality.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft